Gov. Kasich (R-OH) Virtually Certain to Run for President, Sources Say

[Statistikhengst]

Ohio Gov. John Kasich Virtually Certain to Run for President Sources Say - ABC News

John Kasich is “virtually certain” to jump into the race for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, sources close to the Ohio governor tell ABC News.

Kasich has said his wife and daughters have given him a green light to run and in recent days Kasich has told his political advisors to begin preparing for a likely campaign. Kasich travels to New Hampshire in early June and recently did a fundraising trip to California. If he makes the final decision to run, he will make the announcement in late June or July.

FYI

 

[Mac1958]

Good, he seems like a pretty smart, rational, level-headed guy. At least for a politician.

I don't know what kind of chance he has.

.

 

[candycorn]

So they're getting up near 20 candidates. All the more likely that high GOP Priestess Princess Freebus has to start lopping off people BEFORE they have a showing in the Iowa caucus.

Anything that weakens the GOP (in it's current form) is a net plus for America.

 

[Statistikhengst]

So they're getting up near 20 candidates. All the more likely that high GOP Priestess Princess Freebus has to start lopping off people BEFORE they have a showing in the Iowa caucus.

Anything that weakens the GOP (in it's current form) is a net plus for America.

"Princess Freebus"?

 

[Rozman]

Yay.....this is tremendous.....
And another day for Hilly baby to stay away from the press....

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Good, he seems like a pretty smart, rational, level-headed guy. At least for a politician.

I don't know what kind of chance he has.

.

Conservatives will ravage him for expanding ObamaCare in Ohio

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

So they're getting up near 20 candidates. All the more likely that high GOP Priestess Princess Freebus has to start lopping off people BEFORE they have a showing in the Iowa caucus.

Anything that weakens the GOP (in it's current form) is a net plus for America.

I don't see why having multiple candidates somehow weakens the party. It gives voters an actual choice. Unfortunately, nobody can say the same for your party since according to many of you they've already decided for you who you're going to support. Now there's some real democracy in action, huh.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Yet another social conservative, just what the GOP needs...

 

[JakeStarkey]

This is good news. If Kasich polls well, he may force out half dozen or so from the free loader free right who run without any chance whatsover of winning. Time will tell.

 

[Mac1958]

Good, he seems like a pretty smart, rational, level-headed guy. At least for a politician.

I don't know what kind of chance he has.

.

Conservatives will ravage him for expanding ObamaCare in Ohio

Yeah, that's a target on his back. RINO designation on the way.

.

 

[Statistikhengst]

So they're getting up near 20 candidates. All the more likely that high GOP Priestess Princess Freebus has to start lopping off people BEFORE they have a showing in the Iowa caucus.

Anything that weakens the GOP (in it's current form) is a net plus for America.

I don't see why having multiple candidates somehow weakens the party. It gives voters an actual choice. Unfortunately, nobody can say the same for your party since according to many of you they've already decided for you who you're going to support. Now there's some real democracy in action, huh.

Gee, Republicans didn't mind having only two or three candidates - or less - for a long, long, long time. 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004....

Do hypocrisy much?

 

[Statistikhengst]

Good, he seems like a pretty smart, rational, level-headed guy. At least for a politician.

I don't know what kind of chance he has.

.

Conservatives will ravage him for expanding ObamaCare in Ohio

Yeah, that's a target on his back. RINO designation on the way.

.

The frothers are not going to like this.

 

[LoneLaugher]

The idea that having over a dozen primary candidates is a good thing is simple rationalizing. The majority of those vying for the GOP nod are simply not serious candidates. Having them share the stage with those who are is foolish.

The idea that the Democratic nominee will be decided without a primary contest is also silliness.

 

[candycorn]

So they're getting up near 20 candidates. All the more likely that high GOP Priestess Princess Freebus has to start lopping off people BEFORE they have a showing in the Iowa caucus.

Anything that weakens the GOP (in it's current form) is a net plus for America.

I don't see why having multiple candidates somehow weakens the party. It gives voters an actual choice. Unfortunately, nobody can say the same for your party since according to many of you they've already decided for you who you're going to support. Now there's some real democracy in action, huh.

Well, just to clarify, I'm not a democrat. I'm an independent voter whose views are in alignment with the Democratic party in a plurality of issues. I think we should expand nuke energy (have the Navy that has proven it can operate reactors for 50 years run them though), get rid of the NEA, Saturday mail delivery, mandatory minimums for those who commit crimes committed with a firearms, expanding our missions in space 10 fold by expanding tax credits for companies that build launch or exploration vehicles.... If the GOP would move toward the center on gay rights, abortion, nationwide health care, solidifying social security, and away from these crazy ideas to where they want to legalize discrimination... I could be swayed VERY easily. In fact, locally, I probably split my ticket 60/40 in favor of dems/independents. Not everyone has a stated affiliation.

As for your post, you're dealing with galactic sized egos in most cases when you're dealing with politicians. Darth Vader and Han Solo, if they were to pool their resources along with Capt. Kirk could not explore the size of Rick Perry's, Ted Cruz's or Rand Paul's ego in a lifetime. You could likely add a few others into that description. The problem is that any sober observer knows that none of those three will be the party's nominee outside of the bubonic plague hitting the RNC and killing all of the other candidates.

So RNC Chairwoman Princess Freebus has to take these 20 candidates and either tell them verbally that they have no chance and won't be part of the debates they have scheduled OR he will have to manage a debate that gives each candidate about 42 seconds of camera time. Six debates are scheduled before the Iowa Caucus. There will be no unimpeachable criteria she can use to show these guys, "Look, you suck...you're not coming to the next debate".

One thing that could happen is that the media outlets could run a two-nighter:
1 August 6, 2015 Ohio Fox News
2 September 16, 2015 Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, Simi Valley, CA CNN
3 October, 2015 Colorado CNBC
4 November, 2015 Wisconsin Fox Business Network
5 December 15, 2015 Nevada CNN/Salem Radui
6 January, 2016 Iowa Fox News

I'm not sure that would salve the bruised egos of those who are invited to the second night. I'm not sure the venues are not booked for the second night. August 6 is a Thursday for example....an acknowledged good night for TV. The next night? Ratings would be dismal.

Anyway, if it's any other year, the guys look at it and say, "well, okay". Now that the TEA party is involved and they hate the GOP establishment almost as much as they hate the Democrats....it will be interesting to see if there is a push for a third party.

Before you dismiss it...hell, a kickstarter/gofundme campaign last month gave a pizza shop owner a million bucks from the same activists who would be upset if Cruz/Paul/Perry are dissed. Can you imagine how much money they would raise? I know they have imagined it....

If the DNC were smart, they'd schedule their debates on the next evening that the GOP did to force the issue and get all 20 guys on the stage at once.

 

[candycorn]

The idea that having over a dozen primary candidates is a good thing is simple rationalizing. The majority of those vying for the GOP nod are simply not serious candidates. Having them share the stage with those who are is foolish.

The idea that the Democratic nominee will be decided without a primary contest is also silliness.

Agreed.

 

[guno]

They have to get a bigger bus

 

[Statistikhengst]

The idea that having over a dozen primary candidates is a good thing is simple rationalizing. The majority of those vying for the GOP nod are simply not serious candidates. Having them share the stage with those who are is foolish.

The idea that the Democratic nominee will be decided without a primary contest is also silliness.

Yes. When the Democrats had like 20 vying for the nomination in 1972, the GOPers were crowing about it. And Nixon played some pretty damned nasty, nasty tricks.

Ahhhh, how times have changed.

I wonder when Arpaio will put his pink-underwear hat into the ring?

 

[blackhawk]

Lets see the Republican party gives the people multiple choices the Democratic party is giving you the take it or leave it choice of one I think having more than one choice is a plus. I suspect a great many Democrats wish they had a legitimate second choice though I doubt many would admit it.