Survey;What Two Tickets/Candidates Would You Want To See Battle In 2016 Election?

[JakeStarkey]

too far out. Besides, no way Romney wont be running unless he does something massively stupid in the next four years.

Thank you for some common sense intervention here.

 

[candycorn]

Haley is a boob and Rice is a possible war criminal.

I will stick with Romney and his choice for veep.

Haley is a first term governor on the come. Rice is anything but a war criminal. C'mon dude; you're smarter than that.

So...Bush wasn't a boob? He got 2 terms. Biden has had some "boobish" moments; has he not?

Unlike Bush and Biden; Haley has an Obama quality about her; Palin with gravitas.
If the GOP can field these two; the DNC would have no chance in my view.

 

[candycorn]

too far out. Besides, no way Romney wont be running unless he does something massively stupid in the next four years.

Romney won't be running in 2016 because he won't be President. Haven't you figured that out yet?

 

[Avatar4321]

too far out. Besides, no way Romney wont be running unless he does something massively stupid in the next four years.

Romney won't be running in 2016 because he won't be President. Haven't you figured that out yet?

I humbling disagree. It's his to lose right now.

 

[BDBoop]

No, it really isn't.

 

[candycorn]

too far out. Besides, no way Romney wont be running unless he does something massively stupid in the next four years.

Romney won't be running in 2016 because he won't be President. Haven't you figured that out yet?

I humbling disagree. It's his to lose right now.

Really; can you quantify that statement?

 

[Charles_Main]

Now this is assuming Romney will not go for a second term and hands the reigns to his VP. We all know Bill wants Hillary to run in 2016. Odds are Romney's VP will run. But just for fun, what two candidates would make for an interesting clash of the titans?

I would love to see a Christie/Rubio ticket VS Hillary. {I have to look over all of the Democrat choices for VP, no idea yet}
But conservatives have to admit, that would be a great ticket!
But who should Hillary run with to make it interesting?

What I want to see is more than 2 Choices.

 

[BDBoop]

Now this is assuming Romney will not go for a second term and hands the reigns to his VP. We all know Bill wants Hillary to run in 2016. Odds are Romney's VP will run. But just for fun, what two candidates would make for an interesting clash of the titans?

I would love to see a Christie/Rubio ticket VS Hillary. {I have to look over all of the Democrat choices for VP, no idea yet}
But conservatives have to admit, that would be a great ticket!
But who should Hillary run with to make it interesting?

What I want to see is more than 2 Choices.

I honestly don't see that happening any time soon.

 

[Charles_Main]

Romney won't be running in 2016 because he won't be President. Haven't you figured that out yet?

I humbling disagree. It's his to lose right now.

Really; can you quantify that statement?

Can You Quantify Yours? Your the one Sure of who will win.

 

[kaz]

Now this is assuming Romney will not go for a second term and hands the reigns to his VP. We all know Bill wants Hillary to run in 2016. Odds are Romney's VP will run. But just for fun, what two candidates would make for an interesting clash of the titans?

I would love to see a Christie/Rubio ticket VS Hillary. {I have to look over all of the Democrat choices for VP, no idea yet}
But conservatives have to admit, that would be a great ticket!
But who should Hillary run with to make it interesting?

Why would conservatives want Christie on the top of the ticket? Wouldn't they want a conservative? He's great by New Jersey standards, but he's hardly either a fiscal or even a social conservative. I'm personally the former, but not the latter.

Now Rubio I adore...

 

[Charles_Main]

Now this is assuming Romney will not go for a second term and hands the reigns to his VP. We all know Bill wants Hillary to run in 2016. Odds are Romney's VP will run. But just for fun, what two candidates would make for an interesting clash of the titans?

I would love to see a Christie/Rubio ticket VS Hillary. {I have to look over all of the Democrat choices for VP, no idea yet}
But conservatives have to admit, that would be a great ticket!
But who should Hillary run with to make it interesting?

What I want to see is more than 2 Choices.

I honestly don't see that happening any time soon.

No doubt.

Just stating my wishes. In practice I am Currently Searching for Remote land with a Cabin on it in an Undisclosed Northern Direction to ride out the Aftermath.

I don't Care who wins, who Takes Congress, What the SCOTUS says about anything. The System is Broken and Corrupted. we don't have leaders we have People trying to Get Re-elected. They will never make the Hard choices, the Right Choices. no matter who we send.

I Hope I am wrong, But I don't think so. The die is Cast, and as I said the only question left now is how long the fall will take.

 

[Charles_Main]

Now this is assuming Romney will not go for a second term and hands the reigns to his VP. We all know Bill wants Hillary to run in 2016. Odds are Romney's VP will run. But just for fun, what two candidates would make for an interesting clash of the titans?

I would love to see a Christie/Rubio ticket VS Hillary. {I have to look over all of the Democrat choices for VP, no idea yet}
But conservatives have to admit, that would be a great ticket!
But who should Hillary run with to make it interesting?

Why would conservatives want Christie on the top of the ticket? Wouldn't they want a conservative? He's great by New Jersey standards, but he's hardly either a fiscal or even a social conservative. I'm personally the former, but not the latter.

Now Rubio I adore...

Frankly, I think Christi Is Effective. Could Care less if you want to call him Conservative or not.

 

[kaz]

Romney won't be running in 2016 because he won't be President. Haven't you figured that out yet?

I humbling disagree. It's his to lose right now.

Really; can you quantify that statement?

#1: Based on history, Obama's poll numbers are in virtual certain defeat territory for this point in the process.

#2: It's the economy stupid, again, historically he's toast.

 

[kaz]

Could Care less if you want to call him Conservative or not.

That is so gay. I'm always critically concerned with how people "feel" about my post. Thanks, Charlene.

 

[candycorn]

I humbling disagree. It's his to lose right now.

Really; can you quantify that statement?

#1: Based on history, Obama's poll numbers are in virtual certain defeat territory for this point in the process.

#2: It's the economy stupid, again, historically he's toast.

#1: What poll are you talking about?

 

[candycorn]

I humbling disagree. It's his to lose right now.

Really; can you quantify that statement?

Can You Quantify Yours? Your the one Sure of who will win.

He's ahead in enough states according to the polls to give him a number of electoral votes higher than 270.

Your move.

 

[Polk]

I can tell you one name that's been batted around this thread that definitely won't be the Republican nominee in 2016: Rice. In case you guys haven't noticed, she's black. And since the single strongest predictor of someone voting Republican is that they live in a region with a high frequency of searches for the n-word, do the math.

 

[kaz]

I can tell you one name that's been batted around this thread that definitely won't be the Republican nominee in 2016: Rice. In case you guys haven't noticed, she's black. And since the single strongest predictor of someone voting Republican is that they live in a region with a high frequency of searches for the n-word, do the math.

She is black. And not a liberal. The reason the racist, sexist left go out of their way to destroy her...

 

[kaz]

Really; can you quantify that statement?

#1: Based on history, Obama's poll numbers are in virtual certain defeat territory for this point in the process.

#2: It's the economy stupid, again, historically he's toast.

#1: What poll are you talking about?

Polls and history are all public information. If you have no interest in curing your ignorance, then you will remain ignorant because I have no interest in doing basic research for you. I'm not researching basic, factual, verifyable information for liberals too lazy to do it on their own.

 

[candycorn]

#1: Based on history, Obama's poll numbers are in virtual certain defeat territory for this point in the process.

#2: It's the economy stupid, again, historically he's toast.

#1: What poll are you talking about?

Polls and history are all public information. If you have no interest in curing your ignorance, then you will remain ignorant because I have no interest in doing basic research for you. I'm not researching basic, factual, verifyable information for liberals too lazy to do it on their own.

If you'e too lazy to cite your sources, one has to assume that you have no such sources.