Friday, November 09, 2012

2016 starts NOW!

You have now had a couple of days free of election angst. Vacation time is over.

Who are your choices -- or rather, what are your predictions -- regarding the major party nominations in 2016?

Do you think that the "major party" label will be restricted to the traditional two? Both conservatives and progs have made noises about the need for alternatives. (Note: Please understand that I'm asking here for a prediction, not a prescription. Keep wishful thinking to a minimum.)

When it comes to candidates, one factor seems to play a major role: Age. Hillary Clinton seems the obvious choice for the Democratic nomination, even though she will be closing in on 70. That's not a deal-breaker -- Ronald Reagan was roughly the same age when he became president. But a lot of people were very concerned about Reagan's age in 1980, and they were even more concerned in 1984, when a doddering debate performance nearly cost him the election. 

Bill Clinton did everything he could on behalf of Barack Obama this year. I would go so far as to say that Obama would not have won without the Big Dog. It seems likely that Clinton went above and beyond the call of partisan duty because he wants the Democratic leadership to rally around his wife in 2016.

I hate to say it, but Al Gore is also starting to show his years. Some have mentioned Elizabeth Warren: She will be 67 in 2016. Joe Biden, otherwise an obvious choice, will be 74.

Some people are talking about Andrew Cuomo. Maybe. But he calls to mind that famous line from the salsa commercial: "New York City?"

Others have mentioned Rahm Emanuel. Not likely. The progressive base hates him.

Maryland's governor, Martin O'Malley, seems a nice possibility.

Jim Webb? Even better. He would carry an important purple state, and he provides that southern touch which tends to help Democrats.

Personally, I would prefer Al Franken. Granted, his background is decidedly odd. But if a grade B movie actor could become president, why not a grade A comedy writer?

On the Republican side:

Paul Ryan will make a run. I'm sure of that. But isn't his party burned out on the Ayn Rand thing? The great lesson of 2012 is that the cult of Atlas Shrugged is not suited to democracy.

Rand Paul: See Paul Ryan; add the word "Ditto."

Of the oddballs who ran in the primaries against Romney in 2012, two seem quite likely to make return appearances: Herman Cain and Rick Santorum. They will run, but they won't win.

The party base now sneers and boos whenever anyone mentions Chris Christie. For precisely that reason, he's a strong possibility in 2016 -- if the GOP wants to rebrand itself, as it damn well ought to. Dude's gotta lose some poundage, though.

If the party leadership is really serious about a makeover, they might consider Jon Huntsman. The Republicans may not be ready for another Mormon, even though this particular LDS-er is a lot more intrinsically likable.

Jeb Bush? No. I suspect that the Bush name will still be rather pungent in 2016.

Condi? I just don't think she's very popular.

One choice is obvious: Marco Rubio. Republicans now understand that they have a huge Latino problem. Rubio provides the instant solution. Plus, he would carry Florida.

My prediction: 2016 will come down to a battle between Hillary Clinton and Marco Rubio. In that match-up, Rubio has the advantage.
Comments:
Andrew Cuomo is NOT his father. He is every bit the fraud Obama is. I would quit the Democratic Party for good if he were to get the nomination.

Ditto for Cory Booker.
 
The residual CDS present four years for now will make Hillary a non-starter, much as we all want it to happen. Her time was 2008 but the O-bots ruined that.

If you draw a line left to right from FDR to Reagan and populate it with the names of Democratic presidents, Obama would be a point closest to the right side end point. We shouldn't settle for anybody less than a pol closer to FDR. I have no idea at this time who it will be.
 
Mike, If Hillary's out, then Webb is the obvious choice. Rubio will carry the purple state of Florida. Webb will match that by carrying the purple state of Florida. No other candidate has the "purple factor" working for him (or her).
 
Republicans: Christie/Rubio in that order. Christie showed bipartisan class when he praised Obama for the storm response days before the election. Paul Ryan should keep representing Janesville, WI. To Christie: no cheeseburgers for you for four years.
Democrats: Hillary/Bill will be past their expiration date by 2016 as will Biden. Al Franken is certainly intelligent enough for the job, but he will have to get past the SNL thing. Let's hope the Democrats can find a candidate to the left of Nixon. (hat tip to Mr. Mike)
 
Webb would never go for it, I think he's more or less sick of politics. Mark Warner, on the other hand, would be a fabulous pick.
 
Biden 2014! Impeach Obama for war crimes, contempt of international law, contempt of the constitution, and contempt of congress.


 
Hillary IMHO had her defining moment in 2001 when she had the opportunity to say "I'm the Senator from Ground Zero and nobody is more concerned about terrorism than I am, but we need to wait a cotton-pickin' minute before we stampede into giving away our rights in the USA Patriot Act." She flubbed her historic role and I'll never forgive her for it.
 
To paraphrase the late, great L. Fletcher Prouty: no matter who gets (s)elected as president, in order to stay alive and serve out their full term they have to be very aware of the "line they can't ever cross".

So when the "Secret Team" says it's time for another war, or for the current war(s) to continue -- IT WILL HAPPEN!

Obama was a CIA creation, enslaved to Wall Street and Israel. Romney was a Wall Street creation, enslaved to the CIA and Israel.

(The elite ALWAYS hedge their bets.)

As Webster Tarpley observed, the main difference between the rival candidates' backers' intentions lies in how quickly they will work to impoverish you and constrict your remaining freedoms.
 
If Obama hadn't been impatient and jumped the line, we would have had a solid, competent performance from Hillary for 8 years and she would be turning over the candidacy to a seasoned Obama to carry on. Instead we have a bunch of long-in-the-tooth candidates who are not viable. Obama had to be buttressed by Biden's experience so he could not have been teamed with a younger "trainee" candidate and now there is no obvious successor. Just another way Obama failed us.
 
Joe.....This is like playing fantasy football, 4 years in advance.

Ok, I'll play.

I think Biden is too old, as is Hillary. Don't get me wrong, I'm old too and because of that I can say with absolute certainty that old doesn't work well when pursuing any career change. Hillary has the woman advantage, but young people 18-40 (you know I'm old when I think 40 is young)see her as a relic. I love Hillary, I would vote for her, again, but I don't believe she will become our 1st woman POTUS. All of the brand name Democratic candidates have reached their peak. It will be a younger candidate, possibly Cuomo, Deval Patrick, Corey Booker or even Kirsten Gillibrand, but it's time for the Democrats to make a generational shift. They would be wise to try to put a woman on the ticket if not as POTUS, as VP, because women are 51+% of the population and we makeup about 60% of all voters. I could see Elizabeth Warren, despite her age, being a good VP choice, but I don't imagine she even cares about the job.

And I'm with you on Christie. The brother needs to loose about 300lbs to even be able to make it through a rigorous campaign. The rest of the GOP regulars like Ryan and Cantor are too anal retentive to grab up the 18-40 and minorities. As for Rubio, while attractive for many reasons, he does have a few skeletons that might be hiding out in his closet concerning campaign money. If he isn't squeaky clean he won't get past the primary season. Perry is popular with white men, but he's too dumb for the job. The GOP is likely to do something really stupid AGAIN, like nominate another Bush. Jindal or Huckabee or some other guy who is liked by the base but who can't sell himself in a General Election because that's what they've become. The Pup Tent Party.
 
Clinton/Franken v. Huntsman/Christie is what I want. Unfortunately what I'll get is a Dukakis/somebody v. Reagan/somebody.
 
As the candidate will need the money people to advance through the primaries, it will suffice to look at the major fund raising capable politicians. Major HRC advantage there, possibly unmatchable, unless another person hits on the internet fundraising jackpot Howard Dean pioneered and Obama partially used as well.

Marco Rubio is talented, but he is short. Way short. With huge ears. Obama's ears didn't hurt him because he had height.

Americans, who are more irrational and reactive than can even be fully understood, look for height in their leaders. Probably genetic, dating back to paleolithic times. Somewhat short candidates can sometimes get in. Very short ones (M. Dukakis) fail.

XI
 
Who runs in 2016 will surely depend on how horrendous the period 2013-2015 turns out to be, and how well or badly Prez Obama manages to conduct proceedings. If things trundle along more or less as at present establishment figures will head the list - Hillary, Biden in spite of their ages. If things really and truly tank, then a more radically left figure should (I say should) emerge.....Grayson, or someone as yet un-noticed

For Repubs I think Jon Huntsman will run again and be better received next time, whether things tank under O or not. I hope the raving loonies will not be nearly as prominent next time around. If there's a natural pendulum swing to R from D, as could well happen - let's hope fervently that there'll be a Huntsman waiting!


 
The most potent Democratic candidates in 2016 -

Andrew Cuomo
Antonio Villagairosa
Elizabeth Warren
Deval Patrick
Kirsten Gillibrand

Most potent GOPers
Marco Rubio
Chris Christie
Sarah Palin
Rand Paul
Scott Walker

My thought is - this doesn't consider what would actually happen in primaries; merely how effective they would be as a national candidates. The primaries are too chaotic and random right now but I guess I think the ones would would navigate it most easily are Gillibrand and Rubio.

Gillibrand really is an impressive politician.

I would have had Petraeus on the GOP list until yesterday. Also Sarah Palin was really looking funky on her appearances Tues night - she isn't aging well.

Joseph - Interested in your thoughts on the Petraeus thing. Something stinks . . . also, shortly before that mess broke yesterday there was more chatter in the media that Hillary is out as SecState.
 
We hardly get a breath between elections. The beat always goes on. As a Hillary supporter, I would vote for the woman in a heart beat. But I'm not so sure she really wants it at this juncture or perhaps more importantly if she wants to put herself through the meat grinder, again. I don't think age is the real issue though a lot can happen in four years, particularly with health issues and the passion/ambition one must have.

I agree with other posters that Gillibrand is an attractive and impressive candidate possibility. I want to see how Warren does in the Senate. I think she has enormous potential as a mover and shaker. Though she too is in her sixties. I don't see Biden as a viable presidential maybe. I like Joe Biden but I just don't see it. Cuomo? He is definitely not his father [who I always dreamed would run but alas--too many skeletons in the closet, I'm afraid.}

On the GOP side? If this mentality of doubling down and running the Paul Ryans/Bobby Jindals of the Republican world persists, they can hang it up for presidential elections; those birds just won't fly. I thought Jon Huntsman was the best of all the GOP's candidates. He ran a lackluster campaign but experience and substance-wise had the goods. In addition, the man wasn't ideologically-driven enough, so he was kicked to the curb. Chris Christie is going to have the same problem, particularly after his embrace of Obama and FEMA. Christie believes in moderate gun control and OMG: climate change and evolution. That could easily be fatal in a primary season. Rubio? The Republicans will tout him if they think he'll serve as their bridge to the Latino/Hispanic vote. Maybe a VP choice.

Can't believe we're speculating about his already. Hardly get a breath!

Peggysue
 
The candidates for 2016 will depend on what happens in the election of 2014. According to the Republicans nothing has change with the election of 2012 except that they must get the Hispanic vote to win. Any brown faced Hispanic (Marc Rubio) will do.

If in 2014, the Republicans Keep the House and win the Senate then it will be a Republican win in 2016 and a Democrat win if they don't.
 
Bobby Jindal has already abandoned us for his 2016 run. He's got two well paid aids doing all his dirty work now. He'll only show up for photo ops if we get any more disasters. He's been spending more time in Iowa than in the governor's mansion. I hope he pisses off enough voters here that he's forced into permanent retirement.

Evil evil evil man.
 
kat, why do you hate people of Indian descent?

(Kidding. Hey, you had best be prepared for a lot of that.)
 
Post a Comment

<< Home


This page is powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?



FeedWind


destiny betrayed ad

destiny betrayed ad

FeedWind











    FeedWind




    FeedWind