Seriously? Is the GOP field lacking candidates? Does South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham expect to go far in the 2016 republican primary? I’ve continually ignored stories about Graham possibly launching a presidential campaign but I can no longer live in denial. Graham visited Iowa recently and, from all accounts, the trip went quite well.

Report from Yahoo News:

On his first trip to Iowa since getting into the early days of the 2016 presidential race, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham heard some advice from Republicans already thinking about the state’s lead-off caucuses.

They put it bluntly: “I need to show up,” he said.

Graham spent two days in Iowa this week, mostly attending private events with Republican elected officials and activists, as part of his efforts to “test the waters” for a potential campaign.

A member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and a leading GOP voice on foreign policy, Graham also spoke at an event organized by a former Iowa National Guard leader and planned to talk with reporters about national security issues.

A critic of President Barack Obama’s foreign policy, Graham said he would focus on international affairs should he decide to run for president, a decision he expects to make in the next few months.

“I’ve just got to make sure there’s a path for me,” Graham said after a meeting Thursday with state lawmakers. “I don’t mind taking a risk.”

So what is the path for Graham to the nomination? He’s a hawk on foreign policy in line with Ted Cruz, he’s conservative on social issues in line with Mike Huckabee, and he’s soft on immigration in line with Jeb Bush. Seems to me his path, if it exists, is filled with obstacles. Perhaps none so large as general distrust for Graham, especially on immigration, who is often labeled with the nickname “Grahamnesty” on conservative social media.

His only major advantage is his home state of South Carolina, where he sits in a statistical tie for first when his name is included in primary polls.

21 COMMENTS

    • As a libertarian/conservative I find Surfisher’s comments about the President to be disgusting. People like Surfisher and Rudy “I pronounce China, Chiner” Guliani only serve to reinforce negative stereotypes about conservatives.

      • While Surfisher or I doubt any member of this site will be called upon to defend their comments outside these confines Mayor Giuliani will be. Being an ex-New Yorker I have found Mayor Giuliani doesn’t make remarks without thinking them through. He no longer holds a public office nor any office in the party so he speaks totally for himself. You can only be offended by the Mayors remarks if the lefts distorted outrage makes you feel the need to refute them publicly.This hollow exercise in sensitivity and civility is practiced only by one side it seems and serves their purpose of humiliating any opposing dialogue.

        I therefore not only agree with Mayor Giuliani but totally support him.

      • Pkersey69: Obama apparatchik spotted!

        No libertarian/conservative would find Free Speech abhorrent — but, a disgusting liberal shill like you would….

        • To Surfisher, first this is a great forum and I appreciate your passion for political discourse. I strongly support free speech – I am glad Giuliani, you, and I are all able to speak our minds without fear of being locked up, targeted, murdered like could and does happen in other societies. My thought is ad hominem attacks only serve to cloud the conservative message which at its purest, based on reason and thinking, not emotion like modern liberalism.

          • Well, Surfisher doesn’t spend ALL his time making ad hominem attacks. There have been times when he has actually AGREED with other people—-who have made ad hominem attacks. . .

          • Pkersey69 — you are backpedaling here on your original comment:
            “As a libertarian/conservative I find Surfisher’s comments about the President to be disgusting. People like Surfisher and Rudy “I pronounce China, Chiner” Guliani only serve to reinforce negative stereotypes about conservatives.”

            Now you reverse yourself with flowery speech added (“able to speak our minds without fear of being locked up, targeted, murdered like could and does happen in other societies”):
            “… To Surfisher…I strongly support free speech – I am glad Giuliani, you, and I are all able to speak our minds…”

            So what’s your final answer, kid — finding Freedom of Speech acceptable, or disgusting…?
            ————————————————————————-
            What is this nonsense: “…ad hominem attacks only serve to cloud the conservative message…”?

            My attack was not on the conservatives’ message (or do you also presume, aside from finding free speech disgusting, that you have a mandate on our thinking, too?), but a direct response to you, kid.

            ——————————————————————
            That you are a wordsmith is obvious — but the meritorious posters here (Nate, Sam, Josh, DT…) respect straight-shooters, not smooth talkers.

            So cut out the sophistry, or stick to chinning with second-raters like Geothe and Bob only….

            • Surfisher – you’re logic is faulty. Because I find speech disgusting or offensive doesn’t mean I want to censor the speech or I don’t support free speech. I strongly support the right of free speech – what I feel personally about the content has no impact on this. Free speech and opinion are separate and distinct.

            • Now that you qualified it — you get a passing grade.

              The bar is now raised, so more is expected of you to debate or exchange ideas with the meritorious posters here.

      • Pkersey 69: While I stated my views about Mayor Giuliani earlier let me clarify my past remarks with a bit of detail. Surfisher in my opinion has to be one of the most immature, rude, close minded people I have come across. I usually attempt to ignore him due to the fact his post are repetitive and add nothing to the conversation.

        • Booby — my posts are apodictic.

          For you to find them otherwise, only shows your lack of logical comprehension. Since you find the truth “bitter”, you resort to circumlocution… and your modus operandi turns into sour grapes (look up Aesop fable on ‘Sour Grapes’), for that’s what you are reduced to, kid.

        • Bob. Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I replied to Surfisher stating that I 100% support his and the Mayor’s right to free speech. My belief is that attacking the President personally on issues related to his love of America, faith, birth certificate, education history, etc only serve to distract from emphasizing the President’s policy and decision making failures. Almost anytime a Republican or Conservative make a comment like Giuliani just did, the media picks up on it and likes to use to further a faulty narrative about the conservative movement being filled only with nativists, misogynists, and racists. When in actuality the conservative movement has a group of new stars and up and comers who are representative of our great country and disavow this faulty narrative- names like Fiorina, Walker, Jindal, Rubio, Cruz, S.Martinez, Rand Paul, Tim Scott, etc excite the conservative movement because they are fresh faces with in many cases, fresh ideas to help tackle this country’s problems. This is the narrative I want the focus to be on. I want the political discourse to be taking a hard look at the establishment power brokers (Dems and GOP) in this country who feed off the government teet to line their own pockets and keep themselves installed as a permanent ruling class. Sadly, advancing policies that will ensure this nation’s stability and power become secondary to those with their hands on the levers of power.

          • Pkersey69:
            I totally agree with your remarks concerning we as conservatives should refrain from an attack based on religion, birth certificate etc. and concentrate on the issues. However as you can witness by what is being played out with Gov. Walker the MSM makes that difficult when it plays gothca by asking for republican politicians to comment and refute any remarks made whether they are representatives of the party or not. And then interpreting in print to fit their agenda. They also have been known to use a stable of women to besmirch candidates character as they did with Herman Cain.

            I have been accused of being a crummugin by never writing anything positive about the republican party. I like to think I’m any equal opportunity crummugin by attacking both parties so it sounds like we’ll get along fine. My final advice would be to ignore Surfisher and his ilk. They don’t wish to have a serious conversation and resort only in put downs to achieve self gratification.

    • Lindsey better strap on his fighting helmet and so should the rest of us if he becomes POTUS. He will have the USA engaged militarily in every world hot spot imaginable.

Comments are closed.