GOP Presidential Primary

I'm just waiting for my favorite game to roll around again. My favorites for the run are:

Ryan
Rubio
Paul
Christie
Bush :no:
Ayotte :no:
Jindal
Cruz :no:
McMorris-Rodgers

It's going to be great, I doubt we've ever seen so much new talent so prominently featured for a run simultaneously. Obviously, I have a feeling that a few are going to drop early, my money is on Iowa and NH being close, but favoring Paul. Subsequent States are likely to favor Christie, particularly after he tacks right following his NJ gubernatorial re-election. All bets are off if Christie scrambles after winning his re-election. They are polling best right now, 3 years away, so it means nothing.

Am I missing any more long-standing names? This has to be a first that the old guard are largely absent from the field.

Either Christie or Jeb Bush. Bush will easily draw a lot of Hispanic vote while Christie is just a plain cool no-nonsense guy. Of course a lot depends on who will emerge on the Dem side.

https://i.imgur.com/D7xruFj.jpg

Tell that to the candidates. If there is a game being played, I'm watching and talking about it.

By starting the discussion this early they hope to gain the momentum in the public discourse and force a lame duck president situation on Obama.

We just had the longest election campaign in Australia history started by the Australian PM.

It certainly contributed to people's weariness and she was kicked out of office by her own party before it ended.

Long election campaigns irritate people. All talk and promises and no action.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

Obviously, I have a feeling that a few are going to drop early, my money is on Iowa and NH being close, but favoring Paul.

---

Certainly NH favours Paul and Nevada too, but I would be wary of Iowa if I were him. None of the current likely candidates are really looking to appeal to that Evangelical vote that can do so well there (see Huckabee winning comfortably) though the caucus format does naturally suit those like Paul who are likely to have an energised and passionate core following. I would expect a new candidate to rise up running on an evangelical platform in the not too distant future. Really, even an establishment conservative like Bush could have a great deal of success given how beloved George W was amongst that demographic.

Also no way in hell Christie gets the nomination. No. Way. In. Hell. Not conservative enough (at least in popular perception) and seen as too close to Obama.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CountArach

.

Also no way in hell Christie gets the nomination. No. Way. In. Hell. Not conservative enough (at least in popular perception) and seen as too close to Obama.

---

I think that opinions will change dramatically after November.

Quite a bit too early for this. Check the fund-raising success/state headquarters staffing set up totals at roughly April in 2015 and you will begin to get a sense of things. Until then, its all moonlight and shadow.

Hopefully between now and then someone new will come along, because I don't like any of what I see.

A quality, decent frontrunner will emerge, and the Jeb Bush will enter the race and get the nomination thanks to all his moneys and a fear that the only thing that can stop a Clinton legacy is a Bush legacy.

I have no problem with Jeb. He is experienced, stays away from the fringe, is popular with Hispanics and is not retarded. His last name doesn't bother me in the slightest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

A quality, decent frontrunner will emerge, and the Jeb Bush will enter the race and get the nomination thanks to all his moneys and a fear that the only thing that can stop a Clinton legacy is a Bush legacy.

---

The reasons are not important but I am pretty sure the next POTUS will be Jeb Bush.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

His last name doesn't bother me in the slightest.

---

His last name is the same as both the best and worst presidents of my lifetime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drone

His last name is the same as both the best and worst presidents of my lifetime.

---

W being the best of course.

No Clintons, no Bushes, please. Let's get some new blood. Dynasties are un-American.

Time you lot had another Adams I think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

No Clintons, no Bushes, please. Let's get some new blood. Dynasties are un-American.

---

Not voting for a man because of his name is just as bad as voting for a man because of his name. He is not his brother and he is not his father. Judging him on anything other than merit, that's what is really un-american.

Bush 2016.

I would rather see a Paul or someone not your standard mold politician but the chances of that are about nil. The parties and the press would not allow such a thing.

Ralph Nader 2016!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HopAlongBunny

Ralph Nader 2016!

---

Well, this thread only applies to he possible GOP Candidates.

It would be great if a viable third party were put together and not beholden to the two big boys.

We are not likely to see much new from them and their corporate sponsors.

People are not upset enough yet to quite believing their lies and looking for real representation and real solutions to problems.

Everyone thinks Congress and the Government are dumb and doing these things out of shear stupidity.

The honest truth is they do these things to help themselves along with their corporate and special interest backers.

Seems to me they are doing a good job for them while fooling the voting public.

Maybe Petreaus will run on a family values/literacy platform

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

Maybe Petreaus will run on a family values/literacy platform

---

I think he would be much better as an insurgent candidate.

I'm not too interested in who will win the nomination. I'm more interested in the 2 or 3 psycho fundie whack-jobs that will make an early splash and then fade away, but not before permanantly damaging the GOP brand. Those guys are way more entertaining, and if Clinton looks strong on the other side they will be even more animated. :yes:

Weiner - Holder 2016!

ah poop, sorry, wrong party.

There are 6 major networks reporting the news; ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, FOX, & MSNBC. Five of the five show a clear left wing bias and one shows a clear right wing bias. There is really no one reporting the unfiltered facts. There is something very wrong with that. But even dumber is that so many people want to shut down Fox because of its alternative view.

Since they are going to remain biased no matter what we say, why would it be better to have all six telling the same lies? That
only makes it harder to find the truth. Not that anyone actually does that.

I see the GOP are taking that "stuck in an echo chamber" analysis thing seriously. ~:rolleyes:

The "Left" has no American outlet

The "upper middle class white demographic who likes to see stories about poor people, brown people, and poor brown people; all the while still being committed to corporatism" has 4 outlets

There is no left in mainstream America

and even outside the mainstream it's nothing but socially awkward malcontents who know :daisy: all

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

Since they are going to remain biased no matter what we say, why would it be better to have all six telling the same lies?

---

Whether you like it or hate it, what Fox News is doing is unique. To assert they're playing by the same set of rules as any other mainstream news organization is absurd.