2016 GE: Hillary Clinton vs. GOP Field, Part IV

[Grandma]

You do know I went temporarily blind seeing a pic of Hillary???/

I love that necklace she's wearing. I think I'll have the hubs get me one like that for our anniversary, or my birthday, or his birthday...

 

[Grandma]

Unfortunately the left has already crowned Queen Hillary.. Looks like another presidential election I'll have no one to vote for but someone to vote against....

Not so fast, [MENTION=21357]SFC Ollie[/MENTION].

She has to pick a Vice President, and it's hoped that her choice will be someone that can run & win in 2020 or 2024.

There are 2 excellent choices - FROM OHIO!

Denis Kucinich and Sherrod Brown are both very experienced and very well respected in Congress. Kucinich wasn't voted out, he was gerrymandered out, after standing with Ron Paul to audit the Fed. Both have very few, very tiny skeletons in the closet, Kucinich has run for Pres before, so he's already been vetted. Both are highly popular in Ohio.

Who does the GOP have that can match either one?

 

[Howey]

Unfortunately the left has already crowned Queen Hillary.. Looks like another presidential election I'll have no one to vote for but someone to vote against....

Not so fast, [MENTION=21357]SFC Ollie[/MENTION].

She has to pick a Vice President, and it's hoped that her choice will be someone that can run & win in 2020 or 2024.

There are 2 excellent choices - FROM OHIO!

Denis Kucinich and Sherrod Brown are both very experienced and very well respected in Congress. Kucinich wasn't voted out, he was gerrymandered out, after standing with Ron Paul to audit the Fed. Both have very few, very tiny skeletons in the closet, Kucinich has run for Pres before, so he's already been vetted. Both are highly popular in Ohio.

Who does the GOP have that can match either one?

I would love to see Kucinich as VP! Sherrod's not that bad, either!

 

[SFC Ollie]

Unfortunately the left has already crowned Queen Hillary.. Looks like another presidential election I'll have no one to vote for but someone to vote against....

Not so fast, [MENTION=21357]SFC Ollie[/MENTION].

She has to pick a Vice President, and it's hoped that her choice will be someone that can run & win in 2020 or 2024.

There are 2 excellent choices - FROM OHIO!

Denis Kucinich and Sherrod Brown are both very experienced and very well respected in Congress. Kucinich wasn't voted out, he was gerrymandered out, after standing with Ron Paul to audit the Fed. Both have very few, very tiny skeletons in the closet, Kucinich has run for Pres before, so he's already been vetted. Both are highly popular in Ohio.

Who does the GOP have that can match either one?

Good lord not Brown.......I have my reasons. And Kucinich, well, he'd fit, both he and Hillary have lost already. May they lose again........

 

[Zander]

I truly hope they go with Rand Paul.

They would be wise to do so.

A landslide loss would kill the Tea Party wing of the party.

Some of the polling actually shows Rand Paul doing better than Chris Christie in a couple of key states, like Colorado, but in Ohio, Florida, Virginia - Clinton beats Paul by double digits.

Christie's essentially done.

His last election was his last.

You could not be more wrong.

Christie is now in the role he relishes, the underdog!. Underestimate him at your own peril. He doesn't run from hard questions and he fight for what he believes.

 

[Toro]

It's too early.

I heard an interesting comment from someone the other day who said that when the nomination has been open, i.e. when a Democrat President hasn't been running for re-election, over the past 50 years, the clear favorite for the Democrat nomination has eventually lost.

 

[Toro]

There's no doubt the republicans lack a candidate to run against the Hillary Juggernault.

Might as well go with McSame again.

I truly hope they go with Rand Paul.

They would be wise to do so.

A landslide loss would kill the Tea Party wing of the party.

I heard a political analyst and former Republican pollster speak about the 2016 Republican nomination not too long ago. He said that anyone who is a serious candidate for the nomination needs two things - infrastructure and money. Any candidate who doesn't have either is a vanity candidate or is running for the future.

Based on money and infrastructure, he then said there are four, well four-and-a-half, Republican candidates who are serious candidates - Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Rand Paul and Tommy Walker. The half is Bobby Jindal. He said one of those four will be the Republican nominee.

 

[Zander]

There's no doubt the republicans lack a candidate to run against the Hillary Juggernault.

Might as well go with McSame again.

I truly hope they go with Rand Paul.

They would be wise to do so.

A landslide loss would kill the Tea Party wing of the party.

I heard a political analyst and former Republican pollster speak about the 2016 Republican nomination not too long ago. He said that anyone who is a serious candidate for the nomination needs two things - infrastructure and money. Any candidate who doesn't have either is a vanity candidate or is running for the future.

Based on money and infrastructure, he then said there are four, well four-and-a-half, Republican candidates who are serious candidates - Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Rand Paul and Tommy Walker. The half is Bobby Jindal. He said one of those four will be the Republican nominee.

Christie will eat all of their lunches. Then he'll eat Hillary too.

PS- who is Tommy Walker?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Toro]

I'm sorry, Scott Walker.

 

[candycorn]

2.) Clinton is showing considerable strength in the so-called "Clinton 6 states" (three of which have been polled). The "Clinton 6", as I call them, are the six southern states that Bill Clinton won in both 1992 and 1996, that Obama never won. They are: WV, KY, MO, AR, LA and TN. I did a write-up over this phenomenon in November 2012.

I think you could kiss off KY and LA and WV. TN is a long shot. AR and MO are interesting but I think the better strategy would be to shore up IA before spending resources there. Either one of the two (MO, AR) and the GOP's goose is cooked.

 

[Grandma]

PS- who is Tommy Walker?

Tommy Walker (b. circa 1943) was the son of Group Captain Walker. Captain Walker was believed to have died in combat when his plane was shot down during the War, shortly before Tommy's birth.

Captain Walker made a surprise appearance at his home shortly after the War ended. In a confrontation with his presumed widow's new husband, Captain Walker was killed - in front of Tommy, who developed hysterical deafness, dumbness, and blindness as a result.

But the kid sure plays a mean pinball.

 

[william the wie]

It's too early.

I heard an interesting comment from someone the other day who said that when the nomination has been open, i.e. when a Democrat President hasn't been running for re-election, over the past 50 years, the clear favorite for the Democrat nomination has eventually lost.

I would suspect that has been true for more than a century.

 

[Statistikhengst]

It's too early.

I heard an interesting comment from someone the other day who said that when the nomination has been open, i.e. when a Democrat President hasn't been running for re-election, over the past 50 years, the clear favorite for the Democrat nomination has eventually lost.

[MENTION=25283]Sallow[/MENTION]

That's not true, and I will go back more than 50 years:

FDR was the clear front runner before 1932 (but there were no primaries yet)
Adlai Stevenson was the very clear front runner before both 1952 and in 1956.
Kennedy was the clear front runner before 1960 (he carried 10 of the 14 states that had primaries in that year)
Mondale was the clear front runner before 1984
Gore was the clear front runner before 2000

But it is true that in years where the Democratic party started (and often ended) as the underdog, that the guy who go the nomination was not at the front of the pack to begin with:

Humphrey 1968
McGovern 1972
Carter 1976
Dukakis 1988
Clinton 1992 (he started at 3%)
Kerry 2004
Obama 2008

A complete comparison is not possible, for there has never been this much polling this far out for a presidential election, not even in 2008.


However, the case of Clinton is quite unique, and will be one for the history books. The parallels between herself and two well-known Republicans is nothing less than amazing: Eisenhower (the same kind of draft movement for him appears now to be forming for her) and Reagan (he lost one nomination only to come back four years later and become the solid front runner and win the next nomination).

 

[Statistikhengst]

It's too early.

I heard an interesting comment from someone the other day who said that when the nomination has been open, i.e. when a Democrat President hasn't been running for re-election, over the past 50 years, the clear favorite for the Democrat nomination has eventually lost.

I would suspect that has been true for more than a century.

No, it has not.