I'm not suggesting he's going to win (although one can still dream), but he's getting more attention than probably any third party candidate since Ross Perot. It seems like everyday he's got an interview with MSNBC, CNN, or even Fox News. He's been getting endorsements from some very noticeble people such as Krist Novoselic, the co-founder and former bassist of Nirvana. Also, Gary Johnson's name has been moving up on the Google search lists over the past few months. My hope is that he's ablw to get at least 15% in the national polls so he'd be allowed to be part of the debates in the fall.

From any point of view other than an oligarchical billionaire of light skinned male land owners.

For a Human Rights Point of View:

http://bust.com/general/13923-5-reasons-why-ted-cruz-becoming-president-would-be-bad-for-women.html

From an Environmental Point of View:

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/05/ted-cruz-joins-gop-group-demanding-that-justice-dept-stop-probing-big-oils-climate-denial/

From a Political Point of View:

http://personalliberty.com/why-ted-cruz-shouldnt-be-president/

From a Freedom from Religious Point of View:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/morgan-guyton/the-theology-of-governmen_b_4020537.html

For Business and the Internet:

http://www.inc.com/jeremy-quittner/ted-cruz-announces-for-presidential-run-2016.html

So to recap: he is bad for human rights, politics, patriotism, the environment, business, freedom of information and the internet and one of the founding principals of the USA which is Freedom from Religion.

I would seriously check your new sources if they are telling you that Ted Cruz is a reasonable person.  Even Texans want to get rid of him.

Um, the problem isn't socialism, it's oligarchy.  Of which, Trump would only support and increase.

I think you have your words mixed up.

Wait, what? 

All those things are imporant and should be done: " ...fiscally conservative/socially liberal platform. Some of their positions involve cutting national defense spending, shrinking the overall size of government, getting out of the Middle East, ending the drug war, and nationally legalizing marijuana."

Those are mostly rather tame.  What in there would anyone disagree with?

+1

Gary Johnson is the best candidate by far and it's about time libertarians get some attention. 

I haven't read everything, but stuff I've read really doen't matter to me. But bear in mind - I'm European and I judge your candidates on what plans they have for Europe. And from what I've hear from Clinton, Trump and Cruz, only Cruz seems to understand what Europe needs right now to avoid tragedy.

Cutting national defence spending. That's a red flag from me and should be for every American. Your wealth and position is secured and largely based on the strenght of your army.

That's the funniest thing I've heard in my life.

Let me give you a sense of where America is on the political spectrum:

|1 ----------2-----3-------------4-------5-------------6-----7----------------------------------8--------9---------------10|

1. Anarchy
2. Communism
3. Socialism
4. Scandinavia
5. Rest of Europe
6. Centre
7. Australia
8. USA under Obama
9. USA under Bush
10. Fascism

America is WAY to the right. Nowhere near even the semblance of socialism. Your "socialist" healthcare system is nothing more than mandating that people buy private health insurance if they can afford to. Your "socialist" higher education system is dominated massively by private universities, and citizens who wish to study at them have to be born into wealth or be lucky enough to either get a scholarship or have a family willing to go into massive debt.

Your "socialist" regulations of your banking system are so lax that you have private banks that send the entire world into recession or depression. Your "socialist" economic system is so underdeveloped in terms of government services that there are horror stories about the lines at your DMV. Your "socialist" gun laws make a mockery of the concept of protection of the populace. And your government does its best to destroy unions that are nothing more than collections of people within similar jobs hoping for bargaining power, because it challenges private corporate power.

If you honestly think that America is "too socialist", or even "slightly socialist", then you need to recalibrate your sense of the political spectrum. Hillary Clinton, for instance, is more right-wing than Australia's right-wing current Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, and is comparable to our previous far-right-wing Prime Minister, Tony Abbott. Bernie Sanders would be considered a right-wing member of our major left-wing party (the Labor Party). Basically, he would be in the centre of Australian politics... which is still to the right of the true "centre" of the spectrum.

As for so-called "Political Correctness", that's one of those terms that gets invoked by people who have no solid argument on the issue. A real argument that could be put forward is that, when you construct rules around what can be said, you usually end up hiding the problem rather than fixing it. But those who invoke the "PC" argument aren't doing that - they're arguing that they should be allowed to say whatever they want. And mostly, you have that right (there are certain, very specific, restrictions on speech - such as no shouting "Fire" in a crowded theatre and causing a stampede that could kill people). What you don't have is the privilege of being able to say it without people calling you out for it. It's not about political correctness, it's about not being a dick, and being called out for being a dick if you choose to be one.

Oh, and "return to Capitalism"? Really? Even when Americans choose to be "socialist", they do it in a capitalist way. Instead of introducing a single-payer healthcare system, which isn't even socialist (to be socialist, the government would have to own the means of production, not just centralise the payment system for healthcare), your Democratic party introduces a system that primarily benefits the Health Insurance Industry (did you ever wonder why all those private companies actually argued in favour of Obamacare?). America is beyond mere Capitalism. You could call it Ultra-capitalism. A "return to Capitalism" would mean moving to the left for America.

Both are someone I don't really like to see at position of any kind of power. But my prediction is that Trump will bulldoze Hilary who is seems to be moving toward far right again for the general.

It is the bolded that allowed Trump to clinch the nomination, in my opinion, and for good reason. Anti-Trump protestors have been shooting themselves in the foot, resorting to intimidation, feels-over-reals tactics which have led to the Trigglypuff meme and a huge backlash against Depaul University's inaction during Milo Yiannopulous's visit. And while Trump has said some pretty dumb things, he's not afraid to speak out. To be frank, I'd rather have someone who's not afraid to sound stupid over someone who's pretending to be smart.