Of course it doesn't. But if you're a libertarian and prioritize social issues, you might hold your nose and accept Sanders' economic policy rather than accept the Dominionist totalitarianism that the rest of the Republican candidates want.
If you are capable of accepting Sanders' economic policy, you are at best a Social Democrat (Euro-style), but certainly not a Libertarian. Cruz is more Libertarian than Sanders is. On social issues, Cruz and Paul are not far apart
Normally, yes. Like Ted Cruz would be pretty good at the first, but horrible at the second. While a John Kasich would be pretty good at the second, but horrible at the first.
However, w/ Trump, those dynamics don't apply. In the Primaries, he has tremendous appeal to Evangelicals, despite his past pro-Choice stances, despite the fact that he cheated on Ivana, despite him posing weirdly w/ his daughter Ivanka. Had any other GOP candidate w/ Trump's personal history - sans the name and the ownership of the Trump empire - stood in the primaries, he'd have been steamrolled by Cruz or Carson. Now, none of these things - having a pro Choice past, cheating on Ivana - would count against him in the general election, so he'd still hold his own. And he can be more himself - wouldn't have to talk about his favorite bible verses in the general election.
I am not locked to the GOP, but at the same time, the Dems have nothing in common w/ what I believe, so I wouldn't waste time looking at them.
Yeah, I do not believe only in conservative policies: while I am pro flat tax, am anti Islamic, support the 2nd amendment, oppose illegal immigration and lowering government regulations, I also happen to be pro choice on abortion (but not to the extent of supporting partial birth abortion or Planned Parenthood fetal tissue trafficking), anti Sunni Arab (which flies in the face of the Bush doctrine and pro Sunni Arab Republicans like Bush, Graham and Carly) and support reciprocal trade practices.
However, on the issues where I might think that the Dems come close, they do not. Like I agree more w/ the Dems than the GOP when it comes to Saudi Arabia. But if I support them, then I'd get something like an Obama, which is only too happy to bend over for an Iran, or has a rabid hostility to Israel - our one friend in the region. On trade, I support both Trump and Cruz, and on the Dem side, we have the TPP right now, so they're not satisfying me there either.
Yeah, one should not blindly follow the party - and that's precisely what the majority of voters particularly on the GOP side are doing. They are rejecting all the establishment candidates, and giving a fair hearing to heterodox voices, like Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich...
No, that agreement just happens to be coincidental in many cases. If one supports Rand Paul's economic platform - which includes a FLAT TAX, Bernies policies are the farthest away from it that one can imagine. If one was a Rand Paul supporter, it makes sense to switch to Ted Cruz, whose stances are not too different. He supports the Freedom Act, which is somewhere b/w the PATRIOT Act and the free for all that Paul wanted, he too is opposed to an adventurist foreign policy. Rand Paul is not anti-Israel and pro Pali, but Bernie Sanders is. If one was really a Paul supporter, Sanders is not the replacement one should look at - Cruz is.
For the record, I support Trump, not Bernie. Previously, I supported Cruz, but his answer in the debate on his OPPOSITION to torture and his 'targeted' carpetbombing (an oxymoron) turned me against him.
Your argument holds good if we were in the general election, and the race was b/w Hilary & Carly. That's not what it is. The primaries have just started, w/ people who oppose Hilary free to vote for anybody - Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, et al. One doesn't have to support someone w/ NO qualifications to run this country at THIS stage. The only people who are SOL are the Dems, who, after O'Malley dropping out, have no alternatives to Hilary other than Bernie.