Who Are the current Top 5 Senators?

[T.hill]

Other than the obvious 3 in Rand, Mike Lee and Ted Cruz. Who do you think rounds out the top 5 or maybe even the top 10? If there even is a top 10.

I suppose I'd say Tim Scott and Ron Johnson, then maybe Jeff Flake, Jerry Moran, Tom Coburn, Jim Risch and Mike Crapo?

[TaftFan]

There are really only three worth caring about.

[compromise]

1. Paul
2. Lee
3. Cruz
4. Scott
5. Johnson
6. Flake (might go up if he votes the right way next time a military spending bill comes up)
7. Coburn
8. Moran
9. Toomey
10. Risch
11. Crapo
12. McConnell?

[BenIsForRon]

Leahy is okay sometimes. At least during the Bush Administration he was.

[Anti-Neocon]

Rand, Lee, and Wyden are my top 3. I'm still not convinced about Cruz. The rest can jump in a lake.

[tsai3904]

I suppose I'd say Tim Scott and Ron Johnson

Ron Johnson is one of only seven Republicans who have yet to ever cosponsor Rand's bill to audit the Fed. Anyone in Wisconsin ever get a response from him on the issue? Even Tammy Baldwin cosponsored and voted for Ron's audit the Fed bill last year.

[TaftFan]

Rand, Lee, and Wyden are my top 3. I'm still not convinced about Cruz. The rest can jump in a lake.

Why Wyden over Cruz?

[ican'tvote]

Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, and Ron Wyden in that order are my top 4. I don't know about number 5. Maybe that guy from Wyoming.

[Anti-Neocon]

Why Wyden over Cruz?
Because he fights stronger for our civil liberties, and that's my primary concern.

Actually looking at some of his votes, I have changed my mind a bit. Maybe Cruz is better. I was thinking he was more of a Kucinich type, but he's really not apart from a few things.

Honestly other than Paul and usually Lee, it's a pretty big blur for me.

[TaftFan]

Because he fights stronger for our civil liberties, and that's my primary concern.

Actually looking at some of his votes, I have changed my mind a bit. Maybe Cruz is better.

Cruz is strong on civil liberties as well.

[compromise]

Because he fights stronger for our civil liberties, and that's my primary concern.

Actually looking at some of his votes, I have changed my mind a bit. Maybe Cruz is better. I was thinking he was more of a Kucinich type, but he's really not apart from a few things.

Honestly other than Paul and usually Lee, it's a pretty big blur for me.

IMO Wyden is better than Kucinich. Kucinich was a hardline left winger. Wyden is at least a moderate on fiscal issues.

[Anti-Neocon]

Cruz is strong on civil liberties as well.
Something about Cruz just doesn't seem genuine. I feel he is an attack dog first and foremost, and only really likes riding on Rand's coattails when it's convenient to fighting Obama and the Dems. I just don't trust the guy as far as I could throw him. Despite that, he still is probably a top 3 Senator just cause the other 47 are so bad.

[TaftFan]

Something about Cruz just doesn't seem genuine. I feel he is an attack dog first and foremost, and only really likes riding on Rand's coattails when it's convenient to fighting Obama and the Dems. I just don't trust the guy as far as I could throw him. Despite that, he still is probably a top 3 Senator just cause the other 47 are so bad.
It's because he is a lawyer and talks like one. But I like what he is talking about.

[Brett85]

1. Paul
2. Lee
3. Cruz
4. Scott
5. Johnson

[Brett85]

If I was forced to pick a top 10 I think I would actually have to include Rubio in that, even though I think that Rubio is terrible. That just shows you how terrible the Senate is.

[T.hill]

If I was forced to pick a top 10 I think I would actually have to include Rubio in that, even though I think that Rubio is terrible. That just shows you how terrible the Senate is.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking,eventually Democrats begin to rank better than Republicans the farther down the list you go. But the majority of em are terrible.

Yet, there are probably a good 10 senators who are better and more sincere than Rubio.

I think however that Tim Scott and Ron Johnson are really good as well, Tim Scott could possibly be a top tier senator with Paul, Cruz. and Lee. Maybe Ron Johnson too.

[T.hill]

Tim Scott's voting record has been really good since he became a senator, right? How about Ron Johnson's?

I've seen some really good stuff from both of them.

[krugminator]

1. Paul
2. Lee
3. Cruz
4. Flake
5. Toomey

or possibly
1. Dylan
2.Dylan
3. Dylan
4. Dylan and
5. Dylan

[Brett85]

1. Paul
2. Lee
3. Cruz
4. Flake
5. Toomey

Flake and Toomey would be in my top five if it wasn't for their recent support for additional federal gun control laws. That's just a deal breaker for me. I wouldn't include Coburn in my top five for that reason either. Coburn, Flake, and Toomey are all examples of Senators who have gotten worse the longer they've been in Washington DC.

[Kilrain]

1. Lindsey Graham (I was going to be a gentleman and put a woman in the top spot, but then I realized that Lindsey is close enough to one)
2. Dianne Feinstein (there is just something inherently sexy about a geriatric Communist)
3. John McCain ("Nice little war you have going on here. You don't mind if I join in, do you?")
4. Chuck Schumer (pro-war, pro-spending, pro-basically everything that is good and right in the world)
5. Harry Reid (probably the most honest man in Congress)

Too bad old Droopy Dog (Lieberman) left the senate, would've been a solid pick in anyone's top 5.

[compromise]

Flake and Toomey would be in my top five if it wasn't for their recent support for additional federal gun control laws. That's just a deal breaker for me. I wouldn't include Coburn in my top five for that reason either. Coburn, Flake, and Toomey are all examples of Senators who have gotten worse the longer they've been in Washington DC.

Flake has seriously screwed over his base recently.

Here's what Glenn Beck had to say:

Glenn has long been a fan of Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ), but his actions lately have been seriously questionable.

“Let me report on this,” Glenn said. “Jeff Flake is somebody that we’ve been for. Jeff Flake is one of the guys who’s the best on the economy. Jeff Flake is a friend. Jeff Flake is a guy I supported to be the senator. I fought for Jeff, and all of a sudden he is for comprehensive immigration reform. We have him on; he doesn’t make any sense. We’re like, ‘Jeff, you’re misguided. You’re misguided.’”

Now Sen. Flake is not just pro-immigration reform, but it seems as though he is now pro-gun control as well. “Now he has flip flopped on gun control. Now Jeff is suddenly for gun control, and he says he’s doing it because maybe he can get a better deal on the Internet tax, that maybe they won’t pass the Internet tax,” Glenn explained. “If he gives in on guns, then we won’t get the Internet tax. I’ll take the damn Internet tax over you taking my guns.”

Sen. Flake has only been in office some four months, and it looks like he has already compromised on some of his core values. Even Matt Kibbe of Freedom Works, a big fan of Sen. Flake, told Glenn in an email that he is afraid “we have lost Jeff Flake.”

More than anything else, this situation proves just how powerful the Washington machine has become. “Powerful, powerful, powerful people,” Glenn said of those in Washington D.C. “When you can turn a guy like Jeff Flake this quickly – four and a half months, they’re powerful.”

Flake has a few years to improve, and I hope he does. But it's undeniable this was a bad start.

[TaftFan]

Flake used to be really strong. He was head of the Goldwater Institute. But the last few years in the House he has declined. And shit has hit the fan so far in the Senate.

Reminds me of Dana Rohrabacher. Almost the exact same thing happened with him. He just tapered off.

[talkingpointes]

Flake used to be really strong. He was head of the Goldwater Institute. But the last few years in the House he has declined. And shit has hit the fan so far in the Senate.

Reminds me of Dana Rohrabacher. Almost the exact same thing happened with him. He just tapered off.

Flake has always been the same man. He is Mormons first. Always been. He'll he was a libertarian back 2011-2012 until Romney came to town. 11% of our pop is mormons.

[compromise]

Flake has always been the same man. He is Mormons first. Always been. He'll he was a libertarian back 2011-2012 until Romney came to town. 11% of our pop is mormons.

What's wrong with being a Mormon?

[erowe1]

This is kind of like asking what the top five cancers are.

[Christian Liberty]

Cruz is strong on civil liberties as well.

But not on foreign policy.

Rand Paul and Mike Lee need to be watched, the other ninety-eight are just crap and their hypothetical nuremberg trials would be little more than a formality.

Cruz may be the ninety-eighth worst, but I won't say he's the "Third Best" or anything like that. I wouldn't ever vote for Cruz or anyone worse.

[Christian Liberty]

IMO Wyden is better than Kucinich. Kucinich was a hardline left winger. Wyden is at least a moderate on fiscal issues.

Moderate for the current insanity, youmean?


If I was forced to pick a top 10 I think I would actually have to include Rubio in that, even though I think that Rubio is terrible. That just shows you how terrible the Senate is.

Ugh... Are there really not ten senators who don't believe the US is a battlefield? Man... the senate really does suck.

As I said, Paul and Lee are the only ones I care about, the rest can screw themselves and that's putting it nicely.


1. Lindsey Graham (I was going to be a gentleman and put a woman in the top spot, but then I realized that Lindsey is close enough to one)
2. Dianne Feinstein (there is just something inherently sexy about a geriatric Communist)
3. John McCain ("Nice little war you have going on here. You don't mind if I join in, do you?")
4. Chuck Schumer (pro-war, pro-spending, pro-basically everything that is good and right in the world)
5. Harry Reid (probably the most honest man in Congress)

Too bad old Droopy Dog (Lieberman) left the senate, would've been a solid pick in anyone's top 5.

LOL! I assume you meant "Worse five."

[anaconda]

Honestly other than Paul and usually Lee, it's a pretty big blur for me.

^These are the only Senators that I am pretty satisfied are not corrupt. Jury's out on Cruz.

[anaconda]

Cruz may be the ninety-eighth worst, but I won't say he's the "Third Best" or anything like that.

This is good. For the time being, Cruz is the 98th worst.

[LibertyEagle]

Flake and Toomey would be in my top five if it wasn't for their recent support for additional federal gun control laws. That's just a deal breaker for me. I wouldn't include Coburn in my top five for that reason either. Coburn, Flake, and Toomey are all examples of Senators who have gotten worse the longer they've been in Washington DC.

Not to mention the fact that Flake is in that gang of 8 on that horrible immigration legislation. He's on my s*** list now.

[Debbie Downer]

McCain, Feinstein, Rubio, Graham, and Rand.

[Brett85]

But not on foreign policy.

Rand Paul and Mike Lee need to be watched, the other ninety-eight are just crap and their hypothetical nuremberg trials would be little more than a formality.

Cruz may be the ninety-eighth worst, but I won't say he's the "Third Best" or anything like that. I wouldn't ever vote for Cruz or anyone worse.

To be honest, Rand and Mike Lee also aren't as good on foreign policy as they are on civil liberties. Both of them take a pretty absolutist position on civil liberties but take a more middle of the road approach on foreign policy issues. Of course Rand's middle of the road foreign policy is still better than the extreme intervention that we've had for the past 50 to 60 years.

[Brett85]

I would say that Chuck Schumer is still the worst U.S Senator by far.

[anaconda]

McCain, Feinstein, Rubio, Graham, and Rand.

Criterion for the first four listed?

[anaconda]

To be honest, Rand and Mike Lee also aren't as good on foreign policy as they are on civil liberties. Both of them take a pretty absolutist position on civil liberties but take a more middle of the road approach on foreign policy issues. Of course Rand's middle of the road foreign policy is still better than the extreme intervention that we've had for the past 50 to 60 years.

Rand's middle of the road is mostly political talking points. He would be the last Commander In Chief to send troops into Syria or Libya.

[Brett85]

He would be the last Commander In Chief to send troops into Syria or Libya.

Yeah, I'm not necessarily talking about that. I was referring more to sanctions, closing down some foreign bases rather than all of them, etc.

But, to be clear I'm still saying that Rand's foreign policy would be a big improvement over what we have, just that he doesn't seem to be as much of an absolutist on foreign policy as he is on civil liberties. His foreign policy is slightly more nuanced.

[Christian Liberty]

To be honest, Rand and Mike Lee also aren't as good on foreign policy as they are on civil liberties. Both of them take a pretty absolutist position on civil liberties but take a more middle of the road approach on foreign policy issues. Of course Rand's middle of the road foreign policy is still better than the extreme intervention that we've had for the past 50 to 60 years.
Agreed. I don't want to start another Rand Paul fight, but basically, I view Paul and Lee as good, but not great, on those issues.

Cruz wants to bomb Iran though, to my understanding. That's not just a minor mistake, its a serious one.

Rand Paul is tricky as it is. I still sometimes swing back and forth as to how much I can forgive from him. I know he might just be playing the game but if he is, he can win without me....

Right now, I'd be supporting Rand, but you know how many times I've said "This is the last time":p

[supermario21]

Tim Scott has greatly exceeded expectations. He's right behind Rand, Lee, and Cruz. Of course he nor Cruz have had any overly difficult votes but they're definitely an improvement over their predecessors, especially in the case of Cruz.

[Christian Liberty]

So far, anyway.

I don't know anything about Scott. I'm glad Cruz is where he is, as far as it goes, but I'd still vote third party for senate if I lived in Texas. Paul and Lee would actually get my vote, for now anyway.

[heavenlyboy34]

This is like asking my top 5 favorite parasites or chronic diseases. I prefer to have none. ;)

[LibertyEagle]

This is like asking my top 5 favorite parasites or chronic diseases. I prefer to have none. ;)

:rolleyes:

[QuickZ06]

:rolleyes:

http://whitefyre.com/rolleyes.gif

[Shane Harris]

Ya know. I miss Demint a little. I think I'd prefer him over Cruz. I always felt like Demint was genuine, not corrupt and really cared. I don't trust Cruz as much with regards to his character or intentions. I'd love to see Demint run as Rand's V.P. No one can hate Jim Demint. Even the left will find it hard to villainize this sweet old gentleman in the eyes of the American public. An excellent V.P. I think.

[T.hill]

Ya know. I miss Demint a little. I think I'd prefer him over Cruz. I always felt like Demint was genuine, not corrupt and really cared. I don't trust Cruz as much with regards to his character or intentions. I'd love to see Demint run as Rand's V.P. No one can hate Jim Demint. Even the left will find it hard to villainize this sweet old gentleman in the eyes of the American public. An excellent V.P. I think.

That would be a great ticket, but DeMint has a lot of influence and power as the President of The Heritage Foundation. Also, on a side note, I don't think the VP has to be a minority or a women for Rand to win. Two white men can still win the general, because by far the majority of the US population is white and will stay that way for a long time.

Also, his VP doesn't necessarily have to be a moderate to win either. Scott Walker could be a strategically good choice and he's by no means a moderate, Tim Scott, Ted Cruz, maybe Nikki Haley, Geraldo Rivera would be fine too. His VP choice has to be articulate, a good debater, and a good public speaker as well. Tim Scott is not, Scott Walker is iffy, idk about Nikki Haley, Geraldo would probably fit those credentials, Ted Cruz definitely does; but he comes off as Joe McCarthey-ish.

[T.hill]

Also, I think both Tim Scott and Ron Johnson are good enough to at least be separated from the rest of the crowd.

[T.hill]

Also, I think both Tim Scott and Ron Johnson are good enough to at least be separated from the rest of the crowd.

and no one really knows Cruz's foreign policy, but it's very likely he isn't a neo-con warmonger. So I have no idea why anyone here can make the assumption that the jury is already out him, because not only does anyone really know, but he's also taken good stances before; on Libya and arming rebels in Syria.

[Brett85]

and no one really knows Cruz's foreign policy, but it's very likely he isn't a neo-con warmonger. So I have no idea why anyone here can make the assumption that the jury is already out him, because not only does anyone really know, but he's also taken good stances before; on Libya and arming rebels in Syria.

Do you have a link where Cruz said that he's opposed to funding the rebels in Syria? I searched for that and couldn't find anything.

[Anti-Neocon]

Lee was easily in my top 2 but his comments about Snowden are disgusting. All the Rand haters need to look at Rand and then the other 99 Senators and realize that Rand may be our best chance that we will see in our lifetime.

Times like this are when we see who is truly on our side and Bernie Sanders might just be my 2nd "favorite" because at least he seems to be truly for the people regardless of what names you may throw his way. This is admirable: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/11/bernie-sanders-orwellian-future_n_3419173.html

Better a Senate dominated by ACLU-brand populist socialists than anti-liberty Republican weasels. This is the most pressing issue facing our country, not "the economy", which will operate mostly the same way no matter which two partier is in charge. By two partier, I mean your standard RINOs and statist Dems who are almost completely interchangeable. Even quasi-libertarian Republican corporatist Koch-brand statists like Lee and Cruz aren't really going to get us anywhere.

If we further lose our ability to whistleblow and expose government corruption, the very fabric of government will become more poisoned and corrupted that we will long for the Bush/Obama years, and only the elite will benefit on the backs of all the other poor, suffering Americans.

[jtap]

Something about Cruz just doesn't seem genuine. I feel he is an attack dog first and foremost, and only really likes riding on Rand's coattails when it's convenient to fighting Obama and the Dems. I just don't trust the guy as far as I could throw him. Despite that, he still is probably a top 3 Senator just cause the other 47 are so bad.

You mean 97, or did something change that I don't know about?

How awesome would that be if we just lost 50 useless senators? :D With my luck we'd lose the best ones though and keep the worst.

[Anti-Neocon]

You mean 97, or did something change that I don't know about?

How awesome would that be if we just lost 50 useless senators? :D With my luck we'd lose the best ones though and keep the worst.
Well Obama said "all 57 states", so I reserve my right to get my math wrong once in a while ;)

[Barrex]

Dont be stoooopid.



0.cajuncocoa (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?164-cajuncocoa)
1. Paul
2. Lee
3. Cruz
4. Scott
5. Johnson
6. Flake (might go up if he votes the right way next time a military spending bill comes up)
7. Coburn
8. Moran
9. Toomey
10. Risch
11. Crapo
12. McConnell?

[Christian Liberty]

I honestly think I just about lost all respect for Mike Lee after his stupid comment about Snowden being a traitor. Rand "Withholding judgment" is fine, especially since he seemd to support Snowden, just in a subtle manner. But Lee blatantly just believed what he was told and made a mockery of freedom and decency. Maybe I'll change my mind later, but I think I'm down to one senator that I actually respect. Forget the "Top five."

[Christian Liberty]

:rolleyes:
he's pretty much right. Now, I'll grant you that Rand Paul is the best one, but "Top five?" That's just a joke..

Lee was easily in my top 2 but his comments about Snowden are disgusting. All the Rand haters need to look at Rand and then the other 99 Senators and realize that Rand may be our best chance that we will see in our lifetime.

Times like this are when we see who is truly on our side and Bernie Sanders might just be my 2nd "favorite" because at least he seems to be truly for the people regardless of what names you may throw his way. This is admirable: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/11/bernie-sanders-orwellian-future_n_3419173.html

Better a Senate dominated by ACLU-brand populist socialists than anti-liberty Republican weasels. This is the most pressing issue facing our country, not "the economy", which will operate mostly the same way no matter which two partier is in charge. By two partier, I mean your standard RINOs and statist Dems who are almost completely interchangeable. Even quasi-libertarian Republican corporatist Koch-brand statists like Lee and Cruz aren't really going to get us anywhere.

If we further lose our ability to whistleblow and expose government corruption, the very fabric of government will become more poisoned and corrupted that we will long for the Bush/Obama years, and only the elite will benefit on the backs of all the other poor, suffering Americans.Yeah, Lee really did lose my respect there. It was just dumb. Like Cruz, when he's right I'll support him on that particular issue, heck, I would work with Dennis Kucinich on Iraq even though I completely disagree with him on most domestic issues. But as far as genuine "liberty candidates" go?
Then again, Lee is never going to be President in a hundred years, so what he says doesn't really matter, only how he votes. So I guess I'm glad he is where he is, even if I basically think he's a moron now.

You mean 97, or did something change that I don't know about?

How awesome would that be if we just lost 50 useless senators? :D With my luck we'd lose the best ones though and keep the worst.

OK, saying "50 best" is just offensive to the human mind...

[ican'tvote]

So far Ted Cruz has been easier on Snowden than Lee. It's a little surprising.

[Christian Liberty]

So far Ted Cruz has been easier on Snowden than Lee. It's a little surprising. Rubio was softer on Snowden than Mike Lee... Which is insane.

[dillo]

1. Paul
2. Lee
3. Cruz
4. Scott
5. Johnson
6. Flake (might go up if he votes the right way next time a military spending bill comes up)
7. Coburn
8. Moran
9. Toomey
10. Risch
11. Crapo
12. McConnell?

as a PA resident, thats a big fuck no

[snowdenbox]

Who are all the names of congressmen who where briefed by Obomba about PRISM. These people need thrown out of office next election !

[Galileo Galilei]

Rand, Lee, and Wyden are my top 3. I'm still not convinced about Cruz. The rest can jump in a lake.

I am with you, here, these are the top 3 (Rand # 1, Lee # 2, Wyden # 3). Rand stands way out far ahead of the others, though.

on a side note, I am from Wisconsin and I heard Ron Johnson backing NSA spying. To me, this is a litmus test issue.

[Anti-Neocon]

I changed my mind though. There's 3 categories to me:
1. Rand Paul
2. Those who sometimes take a courageous stand about something (Wyden, Sanders, Lee, maybe Cruz)
3. The rest are completely useless for liberty issues

I'm sick of comparing voting records and nitpicking about what budgets one person voted for or another. Bernie Sanders has a mind of his own and sometimes is an unabashed advocate of liberty. Yeah he's a socialist but when it came to the NSA situation, who was the strongest? Lee was an enemy. Rand didn't betray us but he sure wasn't strong about it. Give me a Senate of 50 socialists who care about civil liberties and 50 libertarians and that'll be way, way better than 100 "conservatives".