Who will run in 2016?

trust me you are WAY more delusional if you think Rice has even a passing consideration for the nomination.
 
Skeleton Jelly said:
i didn't say he would be, I said I wouldn't shrug him off. There are a lot of issues that the masses support in this country right now that both parties haven't seized on. It's a political issue vacuum. I think we are getting to the point where a libertarian-esque candidate can make some headway. There was also this great article in the atlantic that talks about rand and how the media has manipulated the things he has said. I will get it to you when I am not so lazy.
Click to expand...

I think the American people would be excited to support a true libertarian, Rand Paul is not one.
 
Jarod said:
I don't know much about her, but I think the Republicans have to look beyond the obvious choices if they want to beat Clinton.

Now, the other interesting question is, If Clinton does not run.... who do the Democrats have? Does Biden really have much of a chance? Who else is there?
Click to expand...

biden is fine. the media has overplayed the "biden is such a dope" line of thought. there is nothing wrong with him as a candidate.
 
Skeleton Jelly said:
biden is fine. the media has overplayed the "biden is such a dope" line of thought. there is nothing wrong with him as a candidate.
Click to expand...

I've always liked him, but he is a bit of a blowhard. He is his own person in many ways, and never seems to have been afraid to be his own man, a trap vp's often fall into. I see him as more liberal than President Obama and more progressive, and I am not sure the American people will go for that in 16'. Clinton is more conservative than President Obama.

Personally I would prefer Biden be president, but I think Clinton has a much better chance of winning the general and solidifying the gains President Obama has attained. Its been a very long time since this country has had a liberal S.Ct. and I think if a Democrat wins in 16' we have a great chance of that happening.
 
Jarod said:
I see that, but I think RP does more harm to the Libertarian name than good. A true libertarian will appeal to a big group of Democrats.
Click to expand...

there is nothing I hate more than tangent conversations that pretend that they are in any way related to what I have said.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I think the Democratic nomination will be more interesting than the Republican.

There are currently five front runners for the Republican nomination and no....Rand Paul is definately not one of them (That's just libertarian lala land wishful thinking.). Those are, in no particular order. Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Condeleza Rice.

Republicans would be idiots to nominate anyone other than Christie. He's the only electable candidate they have. He's tough on foriegn policy, he's pro business, he's a moderate on most issues and he's shown the bipartisan ability to build coalitions and get things done.

Ryan might as well have "Owned by the Koch Brothers" tatooed on his forehead. His economic and social views will alienate minorities and women. He's incapable of building a winning coalition. This nation needs another Bush like it needs a hole in it's head but after Christie Jeb would be the only other viable candidate, though a long shot to beat a tough Dem opponent. Rubio is a rookie and too inexperienced and hasn't show the political ability to build a winning coalition, not at the national level. Condeleza Rice, who has shown no inclination to run for public office, has never ran a campaign for elective office and has the immoral war in Iraq hanging over her head like a lead anchor. Not a chance of her winning.

Democrats have more interesting possibilities. Hilliary Clinton would be the obvious front runner if she chose to run and would probably win if anyone but Christie is nominated by the Republicans. Joe Biden comes in close second as a sitting Veep for getting the nomination but the track record of Veeps/Senators running for the top job hasn't been steeler with a few notable exceptions. Then there's Joes ability to put his foot in his mouth. My personal favorite is John Warner. Like Christie he's a crossover politician who appeals to moderate of both stripes and has a steller public/private career. He's also a dynamic personality. Andrew Cuomo is more of a dark horse candidate but is one of the more popular governors in the nation.

If Hilliary does run then my guess is that the race would be between her and Chris Christie. The question then would be could Christie win the nomination with out destroying his national election possibilities like Romney did with the incessantly long GOP primary that forced him to move way to far to the right.
Click to expand...


Joe Biden has as much chance as Barney from the Simpsons. He is not electable as President. IF Hillary runs, I doubt she shes much if any competition in the primary. I doubt Warner would go up against her.
 
Skeleton Jelly said:
nah that's bullshit.

it's just the media circlejerking over having him being the foil to obama. "OH THAT SILLY biden he did it again! Good thing we have obama to keep the clueless privileged white dude in check, LOL!"
Click to expand...

Dude, Biden was put on the ticket for one reason; because he balances out Obama. He is there to appeal to the South and Good Ole Boy types, just like Palin was put on to get people energetic about a fucking fossil. In both cases it worked. Cheney was there to make Bush seem smarter and more experienced. All the VP is (nowadays anyways) is about balancing.
 
Chapel The Evergreen said:
Dude, Biden was put on the ticket for one reason; because he balances out Obama. He is there to appeal to the South and Good Ole Boy types, just like Palin was put on to get people energetic about a fucking fossil. In both cases it worked. Cheney was there to make Bush seem smarter and more experienced. All the VP is (nowadays anyways) is about balancing.
Click to expand...

How exactly did Al Gore balance Bill Clinton?
 
Chapel The Evergreen said:
Yes, Libertarians would have a large appeal to a party that is the polar opposite of Libertarians. Brilliant thinking there.
Click to expand...


Social Liberalism is Libertarian. Sorry if you cant see that, you should study up on the libertarian movement before the Republicans co-opted it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top