Charlie Christ - Florida

We all know about Mr. Crist and his decision to COMPLETELY re-neg on his conservative stances over the years.

Marco Rubio has been running an uphill battle for some time, and as soon as it looked to, to Chuck and pollsters everywhere, that Rubio was going to beat him? Well, let's just say the I, which stands for the Independent ticket, stands for many things in this situation: ignorant, idiot, improbable, impotent (ok, I don't know about impotent, but hey, I don't know for sure he ISN'T, do I?).

Regardless, as the Associated Press has said, Crist seems to be changing his views on life related issues. People like Crist piss me off. If I'm in a position where a person may beat me, and it's looking bad, I'll have the testicular fortitude to at least finish it out and if I lose, so be it. There's a place for moderates in the Republican party, but if the people in your party in your state don't want a moderate for that position, figure out another position. Or drop out of the race, or write a freaking book like all the other retired politicians do! Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure Crist will split the R's, with some voting I, and a Democrat will take the seat. I hope I'm wrong, and that Rubio pulls it out, but I don't think I'm going to be wrong.

Linda McMahon - New York

Linda McMahon will be the Republican running against Blumenthal (you know, the guy who said he went overseas in Vietnam and was caught in the lie?). When I first heard this, I had to wonder if she would PUT THE SMACK DOWN ON THAT DONKEY!!! WHOOO!!!

Ok. Now that I've revisited my middle school years, I'll take a better look.

There's a real chance that she could win... if she stays away from her steroid rhetoric and doesn't do anything too embarrassing on television. Already there is a lot of footage of her and her family doing a lot of things that more traditional conservatives would find less than appealing, and while I hope she wins, I wonder about how much her high profile entertainment lifestyle will go with this campaign.

I, for the record, love seeing Republicans in the entertainment industry run, because it helps to counterbalance the excessive liberal influence from that very same industry. Arnold (you know, the Terminator?) should have been just that, but he unfortunately caved to his liberal wife and let California and celebrity Republicans accumulate a bit of a bad name. Maybe Linda can change this, and more celebrities will "come out of the closet", so to speak. I hope Linda will pull it off. I think she'll be a very strong opponent, and will OPEN UP A CAN OF...oh...right...sorry.

Carly Fiorina - California

I really, really like this woman. She is the former CEO of Hewlett-Packard, and she seems like just the thing that California needs (besides, well, getting rid of Barbara Boxer). She has run a campaign on fiscal discipline and, with her past experience as the CEO of a major company, I have faith she would help to achieve that in California.

However, while I may like her BECAUSE she was the CEO of HP, in California (aka the liberal wasteland), she may LOSE because she was the CEO of HP. The only people hated more than politicians this year are CEO's, and for Fiorina, that's kind of a double whammy. I can't really make a prediction on this one...it's far too close to call.

Rand Paul - Kentucky

From Rand Paul's website:

"Dr. Paul believes in strong national defense and thinks military spending should be our country’s top budget priority. He has also called for a Constitutional declaration of war with Afghanistan."

Awesome. I was very happy to read that, especially since it caught my eye on a libertarian web site that was absolutely BASHING Paul and calling him a "traitor" and "neo-con who rode in on his father's coat tails".

"If it wasn’t bad enough that Rand Paul is a warmonger he’s come out in support of there being Guantanamo Bay & therefore okay with kidnapping people & holding them without trial."-excerpt taken from The Bastard.com, perhaps the craziest web site I've ever been to.

“Foreign terrorists do not deserve the protections of our Constitution,” said Dr. Paul

Even better. Perhaps Paul is a bit less libertarian than his father? These two quote from his website seem to suggest as much.

But regardless, his fairly recent claims that he would have voted against the Civil Rights Act and his reply to the BP oil spill that "sometimes stuff just happens" hurt him a lot. Unfortunately, his ideology seems to hold him back on each instance. I understand (kind of) the thought that Civil Rights would have still happened regardless of federal regulation, because it would have. HOWEVER the Civil Rights Act was absolutely necessary to help wrong an injustice that had plagued this country since it's birth. The BP oil spill, which has only gotten worse since his remarks, does require a tightening of regulatory sanctions and a whole new list of procedures to ensure a catastrophe of this magnitude doesn't happen again. These two instances are what separate the ideologue from the realist, and while I hope that Paul takes a lesson and reigns in that ideology a notch or two so that, if he wins, he can effectively make legislation that reflects sound reasoning with a basis in conservative ideology. Like I've written before, ideology can work two ways: as blinders, making you oblivious to everything else around you, or as a compass, helping you to direct good legislation. I think he will pull off a win, however it is going to be a photo finish. And once he wins, I hope he takes my advice, or there is a good chance he'll only serve one term.