JoeB131 Handicaps the 2016 GOP Field

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2011
167,583
31,056
2,220
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
We really need to break this up into two categories. The Retreads and the Fresh Blood.

The Retreads are relevant because since 1968, every GOP candidate has either been a sitting president, someone who has run before or the son of a president. The GOP likes established, vetted candidates. Sadly, those are sadly lacking.

Jeb Bush would actually be the ideal candidate. A successful two-term governor of a major swing state, married to a Hispanic woman so he could appeal to that elusive voter base, actually doesn't come off like a crazy person when he talks.
His downside, though, is that his name is Bush, and given the absolute disaster his brother's presidency was, no one would go down that road a third time. Also has alienated the Nativist wing by saying Immigrants are kind of alright sometimes. 1-1

Mike Huckabee could be a strong candidate. He did very well in 2008 on a shoestring budget, he's appealing, likable and though he represents the religious wing of the party, doesn't come off like a crazy zealot most of the time. His downside, though, is that the Wall Street Wing is scared to death of him, and he had a bad habit of giving parole to anyone in the Arkansas prison system that said "Jesus' sincerely enough. A couple of those guys have gone on to rape and murder people. In 2008, my boss said he'd vote for Hillary if Huck got the nomination. I suspect that Wall Street would go all in behind the Democrat if he was the nominee.

Rick Santorum- Represents the religious wing, DOES come off like a nutty Zealot when he talks. The only reason why he lasted as long as he did was that the GOP base had to be dragged kicking and screaming to support Romney, and he was the last thing they could grasp on to.

Rick Perry- Governor of a major state with a decent economic record. Appeals to all the major constituencies. Downside- His 2012 campaign was a disaster, and you don't get a second chance to make a first impression.

Fresh Blood -

Chris Christie- Governor of a major state, but not one the Democrats are likely to lose. Had a good reputation as a get things done kind of guy. However, Bridgegate and the fact that NJ is seriously in the red right now has taken the luster off this guy. Also, the ODS crowd is never going to forgive him for palling around with Obama after Hurricane Sandy.

Scott Walker- On paper, pretty solid. A midwest governor who has applied conservative talking points effectively. The downside, he's kind of bland in person. Also, is the country ready to elect a president who never earned a college degree in this day in age?

Mike Pence- Again, Midwest governor with a solid record. However, he lacks name recognition.

Piyush Jindal - I refuse to call him "Bobby". The guy's a weather vane, really trying to see which way the wind is blowing and usually getting it wrong. When he's term-limited out, he's done.

Marco Rubio - Probably ruined his chances with his flip-flopping on immigration.

Ted Cruz - ONly if the GOP wants to lose 45 states and completely give in to the crazies.

Rand Paul - I honestly don't see this guy winning a single state in the general election. But he could make some serious waves using the same nuts who show up and voted for his dad all those times.
 
Rick Perry- Governor of a major state with a decent economic record. Appeals to all the major constituencies. Downside- His 2012 campaign was a disaster, and you don't get a second chance to make a first impression.

John McCain did from 2000 to 2008. Although that was 8 years apart. So did Romney I guess from 2008 to 2012. Heck if Hillary runs in 2016 that's a second chance too from 2008.

Jeb right now is the most competitive, ever since Christie kind of fell out. There aren't really any guarantees he'll really run though, I don't see him being as eager for the position as others have been. His wife will definitely play a role in the decision.

Frankly I don't see Santorum, Cruz, Paul, or Jindal as competitive candidates...and are all probably running for publicity more then anything.

Scott Walker is a wild card.
 
We really need to break this up into two categories. The Retreads and the Fresh Blood.

The Retreads are relevant because since 1968, every GOP candidate has either been a sitting president, someone who has run before or the son of a president. The GOP likes established, vetted candidates. Sadly, those are sadly lacking.

Jeb Bush would actually be the ideal candidate. A successful two-term governor of a major swing state, married to a Hispanic woman so he could appeal to that elusive voter base, actually doesn't come off like a crazy person when he talks.
His downside, though, is that his name is Bush, and given the absolute disaster his brother's presidency was, no one would go down that road a third time. Also has alienated the Nativist wing by saying Immigrants are kind of alright sometimes. 1-1

Mike Huckabee could be a strong candidate. He did very well in 2008 on a shoestring budget, he's appealing, likable and though he represents the religious wing of the party, doesn't come off like a crazy zealot most of the time. His downside, though, is that the Wall Street Wing is scared to death of him, and he had a bad habit of giving parole to anyone in the Arkansas prison system that said "Jesus' sincerely enough. A couple of those guys have gone on to rape and murder people. In 2008, my boss said he'd vote for Hillary if Huck got the nomination. I suspect that Wall Street would go all in behind the Democrat if he was the nominee.

Rick Santorum- Represents the religious wing, DOES come off like a nutty Zealot when he talks. The only reason why he lasted as long as he did was that the GOP base had to be dragged kicking and screaming to support Romney, and he was the last thing they could grasp on to.

Rick Perry- Governor of a major state with a decent economic record. Appeals to all the major constituencies. Downside- His 2012 campaign was a disaster, and you don't get a second chance to make a first impression.

Fresh Blood -

Chris Christie- Governor of a major state, but not one the Democrats are likely to lose. Had a good reputation as a get things done kind of guy. However, Bridgegate and the fact that NJ is seriously in the red right now has taken the luster off this guy. Also, the ODS crowd is never going to forgive him for palling around with Obama after Hurricane Sandy.

Scott Walker- On paper, pretty solid. A midwest governor who has applied conservative talking points effectively. The downside, he's kind of bland in person. Also, is the country ready to elect a president who never earned a college degree in this day in age?

Mike Pence- Again, Midwest governor with a solid record. However, he lacks name recognition.

Piyush Jindal - I refuse to call him "Bobby". The guy's a weather vane, really trying to see which way the wind is blowing and usually getting it wrong. When he's term-limited out, he's done.

Marco Rubio - Probably ruined his chances with his flip-flopping on immigration.

Ted Cruz - ONly if the GOP wants to lose 45 states and completely give in to the crazies.

Rand Paul - I honestly don't see this guy winning a single state in the general election. But he could make some serious waves using the same nuts who show up and voted for his dad all those times.

A solid analysis, but I do have a few things to add.

Rand Paul is not going to be able to use "the same nuts" who voted for Ron Paul. Rand is more a combination of his dad and a Waffle House; unlike his principled father, Rand sticks to a libertarian philosophy only so long as no one says anything about it, then he's back to whatever liberal/neocon talking point seems the most socially acceptable. That being said, Tea Partiers do, for the most part, blindly support him. I can see him having initial Paulite-fueled momentum before floundering out shortly after the first couple of states due to statements that alienate his [dad's] base.

Jeb Bush supports Common Core, and would be easily knocked out of the primary on that issue alone by Tea Party and Evangelical voters.

Chris Christie, Rand Paul, and Ted Cruz would be the only serious candidates from among this spread. I don't believe that Huckabee or Santorum will actually run, and the rest will suffer from their lack of hardcore supporters in the primary to run around putting up signs, knocking on doors, donating heavily, etc. to have much of an effect. Paul has name recognition, Christie has a record of bipartisanship to run on, and Cruz is the only candidate who knows what he's talking about and actually believes what he says. The libertarian wing of the Republican Party will be split between the sheep supporting Paul and the more hardcore activists supporting Cruz, with Paul being much more well-financed. I suspect that Christie and one another person would be able to rise above the inevitable mudslinging here. I really don't know who that fourth person would be, but there has to be one. There always is.
 
I do not believe the person who will be the Republican nominee appeared in that list. Not that I know who it might be - just that I don't believe it will be any of them. But then I was hoping John Kerry would win because of my "alcoholic America" theory.
 
if its Jeb Bush vs Hilary Clinton ... will anyone vote ?

Sure. I would vote for Jeb. He is not my first choice, but I would like his federal Judge appointments better. Jeb is much better on the Second amendment. Jeb has never murdered anyone. Jeb would not have spousal baggage.
 
Rick Perry- Governor of a major state with a decent economic record. Appeals to all the major constituencies. Downside- His 2012 campaign was a disaster, and you don't get a second chance to make a first impression.

John McCain did from 2000 to 2008. Although that was 8 years apart. So did Romney I guess from 2008 to 2012. Heck if Hillary runs in 2016 that's a second chance too from 2008.

Jeb right now is the most competitive, ever since Christie kind of fell out. There aren't really any guarantees he'll really run though, I don't see him being as eager for the position as others have been. His wife will definitely play a role in the decision.

Frankly I don't see Santorum, Cruz, Paul, or Jindal as competitive candidates...and are all probably running for publicity more then anything.

Scott Walker is a wild card.

There are two other figures within the GOP that one should not underestimate:

Haley Barbour and Robert Bentley.
 
Rick Perry- Governor of a major state with a decent economic record. Appeals to all the major constituencies. Downside- His 2012 campaign was a disaster, and you don't get a second chance to make a first impression.

John McCain did from 2000 to 2008. Although that was 8 years apart. So did Romney I guess from 2008 to 2012. Heck if Hillary runs in 2016 that's a second chance too from 2008.

The difference, I guess, is that McCain didn't win in 2000, but he made a decent showing. The same could be said for Romney in 2008, or Reagan in 1976 or Bush-41 in 1980 or Dole in 1980 and 1988. They didn't win the nomination, but they made an okay enough showing to get a second look.

Perry, on the other hand, was ill-prepared, with his inability to name which three departments he'd eliminate being the snapshot of his campaign.

Now, could he rehabilitate himself by doing what he should have done in 2012? (i.e. do the groundwork and have well-prepared positions?) Maybe. But he made his hill a lot harder to climb by his poor performance.

Jeb right now is the most competitive, ever since Christie kind of fell out. There aren't really any guarantees he'll really run though, I don't see him being as eager for the position as others have been. His wife will definitely play a role in the decision.
...

The wives always play a roll.

Frankly I don't see Santorum, Cruz, Paul, or Jindal as competitive candidates...and are all probably running for publicity more then anything.

Scott Walker is a wild card.

My thought on Paul is that there is that nutty bunch that voted for his father. The real problem with the nominating process is that Iowa and NH play an outsized role, and folks in those states love messing with things, like when Pat Buchanan won the NH primary in 1996 or Mike Huckabee won Iowa in 2008. It allows the kind of mischief where they can stick their finger in the eye of the establishment.
 
JoeAmpad thought Gingrich would win in 12.

I thought he'd have done better against Obama than the Weird Mormon Robot your boys on Wall Street put up.

He wouldn't have said stupid shit like "I like to fire people". And "It's totally awesome that they had these Chinese Women behind barbed wire making me money."
 
What about Ohio's Governor Kasich? He's rumored to be planning to run.

Uh, maybe. Frankly, he'd be in the same category as Pence and Walker.

Maybe we need a "bland Midwest Governor" primary to weed on one of them.

I was also thinking maybe the way to resolve the GOP nomination would be like immortals in Highlander.

highlander-intro-o.gif


"There can be only one!"
 
We really need to break this up into two categories. The Retreads and the Fresh Blood.

The Retreads are relevant because since 1968, every GOP candidate has either been a sitting president, someone who has run before or the son of a president. The GOP likes established, vetted candidates. Sadly, those are sadly lacking.

Jeb Bush would actually be the ideal candidate. A successful two-term governor of a major swing state, married to a Hispanic woman so he could appeal to that elusive voter base, actually doesn't come off like a crazy person when he talks.
His downside, though, is that his name is Bush, and given the absolute disaster his brother's presidency was, no one would go down that road a third time. Also has alienated the Nativist wing by saying Immigrants are kind of alright sometimes. 1-1

Mike Huckabee could be a strong candidate. He did very well in 2008 on a shoestring budget, he's appealing, likable and though he represents the religious wing of the party, doesn't come off like a crazy zealot most of the time. His downside, though, is that the Wall Street Wing is scared to death of him, and he had a bad habit of giving parole to anyone in the Arkansas prison system that said "Jesus' sincerely enough. A couple of those guys have gone on to rape and murder people. In 2008, my boss said he'd vote for Hillary if Huck got the nomination. I suspect that Wall Street would go all in behind the Democrat if he was the nominee.

Rick Santorum- Represents the religious wing, DOES come off like a nutty Zealot when he talks. The only reason why he lasted as long as he did was that the GOP base had to be dragged kicking and screaming to support Romney, and he was the last thing they could grasp on to.

Rick Perry- Governor of a major state with a decent economic record. Appeals to all the major constituencies. Downside- His 2012 campaign was a disaster, and you don't get a second chance to make a first impression.

Fresh Blood -

Chris Christie- Governor of a major state, but not one the Democrats are likely to lose. Had a good reputation as a get things done kind of guy. However, Bridgegate and the fact that NJ is seriously in the red right now has taken the luster off this guy. Also, the ODS crowd is never going to forgive him for palling around with Obama after Hurricane Sandy.

Scott Walker- On paper, pretty solid. A midwest governor who has applied conservative talking points effectively. The downside, he's kind of bland in person. Also, is the country ready to elect a president who never earned a college degree in this day in age?

Mike Pence- Again, Midwest governor with a solid record. However, he lacks name recognition.

Piyush Jindal - I refuse to call him "Bobby". The guy's a weather vane, really trying to see which way the wind is blowing and usually getting it wrong. When he's term-limited out, he's done.

Marco Rubio - Probably ruined his chances with his flip-flopping on immigration.

Ted Cruz - ONly if the GOP wants to lose 45 states and completely give in to the crazies.

Rand Paul - I honestly don't see this guy winning a single state in the general election. But he could make some serious waves using the same nuts who show up and voted for his dad all those times.

And all you've got to run is Hillary.

Hillary-Clinton-on-Benghazi.jpeg


hillary-clinton-benghazi.jpg
 
I see Little Joe is still stuck in Ds good Rs bad mindset, instilled in him by the power elite. Sad. Very sad....duped again and again and again....

Both parties suck and both are only interested in increasing their wealth and power, and to hell with the American people.

It matters not. The fix is in....just as Big Ears governed much like W, whoever replaces him in 2016 will govern like him. The welfare/warfare state is firmly in place...here comes WWIII!!!
 
[

And all you've got to run is Hillary.

]

Tell you what, guy.

You show me ONE PERSON who voted for Obama in 2012 who says, "Wow, if only I knew the TRUTH about Benghazi, I'd have totally voted for Romney."

When you can find that person for me, then I will take all your whining about Benghazi seriously.

Because the only people who care about the Benghazi Non-Scandal are the ones who weren't going to vote for a Democrat anyway.

You do get this, right? That in order to win in 2016, you have to convince some of the folks who voted for Obama in 2012 to vote for your guy this time? Right?
 
I see Little Joe is still stuck in Ds good Rs bad mindset, instilled in him by the power elite. Sad. Very sad....duped again and again and again....

Both parties suck and both are only interested in increasing their wealth and power, and to hell with the American people.

It matters not. The fix is in....just as Big Ears governed much like W, whoever replaces him in 2016 will govern like him. The welfare/warfare state is firmly in place...here comes WWIII!!!

Yes, guy, I'm sure the Bilderbergers and Illuminati are all conspiring against you.

Now sit down, the grownups are talking.
 
if its Jeb Bush vs Hilary Clinton ... will anyone vote ?

Sure. I would vote for Jeb. He is not my first choice, but I would like his federal Judge appointments better. Jeb is much better on the Second amendment. Jeb has never murdered anyone. Jeb would not have spousal baggage.

Now you see, here's the thing.

I don't care who the Clintons "murdered". Frankly, i hear that sort of crap, and i conclude i'm dealing with a loon.

What I care about is that in the Clinton years, the economy was fucking awesome for most of us, while in the Bush years, the middle class got screwed repeatedly.

And frankly, repealing the 2nd Amendment would be awesome, as it was a terrible idea from the get go.
 
I see Little Joe is still stuck in Ds good Rs bad mindset, instilled in him by the power elite. Sad. Very sad....duped again and again and again....

Both parties suck and both are only interested in increasing their wealth and power, and to hell with the American people.

It matters not. The fix is in....just as Big Ears governed much like W, whoever replaces him in 2016 will govern like him. The welfare/warfare state is firmly in place...here comes WWIII!!!

Yes, guy, I'm sure the Bilderbergers and Illuminati are all conspiring against you.

Now sit down, the grownups are talking.

No doubt you think Big Ears has done a much better job than W.

Proof of your psychosis.
 

Forum List

Back
Top