Because We Have a Problem: 2016 Forcasting List

Interesting, given that you seem to lean to the American right (unless I am seriously misreading your posts or confusing you with someone else). Is it more his personality or his positions on some issues like guns and energy?

It's mainly his positions. I think he is also a good strategic choice, as he can appeal to people in red states. Put him up against Cruz and you could get a landslide.

(I really don't want Cruz to win the Republican nomination)
 
I think anyone would get a landslide against Cruz. He is way too extreme and even has pissed off most of the Republican establishment. If Cruz was somehow nominated it would probably turn more into a "anyone but Cruz" vote for a lot of people.
 
It's usually bad form for a politician re-elected in 2014 to immediately turn around and announce a presidential bid; those folks are likely to hang back until 2015 to enter the ring. Guys like Schweitzer (who chose not to run for the vacant Senate seat in 2014) or O'Malley (he cannot run in the 2014 gubernatorial election but could potentially return afterwards, Maryland is weird about term limits) will likely be the first out of the gate, possibly even pre-empting Hillary Clinton.
At least they haven't openly declared 3 years out, like Peter King.
 
I think anyone would get a landslide against Cruz. He is way too extreme and even has pissed off most of the Republican establishment. If Cruz was somehow nominated it would probably turn more into a "anyone but Cruz" vote for a lot of people.

Cruz may not be as likely to flame out as previous far-right candidates if more of the moderate Republicans have bolted to being independents or Democrats (especially in the northeast). It sounds crazy, but he probably has a better chance than somebody like Pat Buchanan did at the nomination

At least they haven't openly declared 3 years out, like Peter King.

I'm pretty sure Peter King is running just to get attention and attack Ted Cruz. I don't think he's a serious candidate, and if Cruz were to not run he'd drop his campaign in a heartbeat.





Also, guys, my bet on Walker might not be as crazy as it seems:
Evil Lefty Online Magazine said:
But the party’s establishment is also factionalized—no candidate succeeded in uniting it in either 2008 or 2012, even though Romney was a clear establishment favorite.

...

There’s another potentially unifying mainline conservative, though, and he lurks in Madison. Scott Walker, the battle-hardened governor of Wisconsin, is the candidate that the factional candidates should fear. Not only does he seem poised to run—he released a book last week—but he possesses the tools and positions necessary to unite the traditional Republican coalition and marginalize its discontents.

Walker has the irreproachable conservative credentials necessary to appease the Tea Party, and he speaks the language of the religious right. But he has the tone, temperament, and record of a capable and responsible establishment figure. That, combined with Walker’s record as a reformist union-buster, will appeal to the party’s donor base and appease the influential business wing. Walker’s experience as an effective but conservative blue state governor makes him a credible presidential candidate, not just a vessel for the conservative message. Equally important, his history of having faced down organized labor and beaten back a liberal recall effort is much more consistent with the sentiment of the modern Republican Party than Jeb Bush’s compassionate conservatism. Altogether, Walker has the assets to build the broad establishment support necessary for the fundraising, media attention, and organization to win the nomination. He could be a voter or a donor’s first choice, not just a compromise candidate.

...

Of course, Walker's not even assured of winning reelection. And Christie has a head start in the invisible primary. But on paper, Walker’s a very credible candidate—even a great one. Mainline conservatives with hesitations about Christie seem likely to give Walker a serious look. Ultimately, he’d need to take advantage of that opportunity, and prove he’s as strong in practice as he is in theory, by performing well in the debates, building a capable campaign, and building support in Iowa. But so far, there’s no reason to think he can’t. If he does, he’ll be the Republican frontrunner.

I'm not crazy, I swear!
 
:bump:

Yup, I'll keep bumping this until 2016! Then I won't have to, the rest of you guys will keep it on the front page.

So Huckabee seems like he's making the speaking rounds both on and off TV. The noise could be for a presidential run or (more likely) just a publicity act in the invisible primary to sell books and stuff. We didn't even include him on the front page, and despite being an active participant in the thread for over the year I can't remember if we talked about him at all.

In retrospect, I think he would have been a better candidate than Romney in 2012. Sure, the NE and West Coast would hate him, but if he lost 5 points there it wouldn't matter because he wasn't winning those states anyway except possibly New Hampshire's 4 EVs. In exchange, he's pretty popular in the South and with evangelicals in the Midwest, and if that got him an extra couple points it would have made the race closer in places like Iowa, Ohio, and Virginia. Florida's weird, don't know if he would have had an advantage there over Romney or not, but not much was needed to tip the state over to the Republicans.

Does anyone think he'll be a real candidate in 2016?
 
I don't see it myself. The impression I get is that the Republicans are not in the mood to nominate the people who didn't win the previous primaries.
 

Ryan's numbers are pretty solid, but that could just be name recognition since he's currently in the news with a major deal. Christie had a similar massive bump after his re-election, same with Cruz and the shutdown, and it's looking like they are fading back to their pre-bump levels.

He's still messing up the path of The Chosen Cheeseman.

I don't see it myself. The impression I get is that the Republicans are not in the mood to nominate the people who didn't win the previous primaries.

He does have some sort of runner-up status from the 2008 primary season--he did as well against McCain as Santorum did against Romney, and the primary season in 2008 ended earlier because the Republican campaigns were suspended after Super Tuesday. Had it gone on longer, I wouldn't have been surprised if Huckabee outperformed Santorum's 2012 campaign.

He also has the advantage of not having a Congressional record which either poisons him with at-large voters if he's in-line with the Republican base or gives the same base a reason to hate him (i.e. Rubio on immigration).
 
I hope the dems put Hillary forward (that's the high percentage hope) and the repubs put a decent candidate out there (quite a bit lower).

That'd make me root for a pubby prez.
 
What is a pubby prez?

Edit: Republican President? Hmm never heard them called pubby.

Anywho - not a Hilary fan eh?
 
I know I'm the guy who put Hillary Clinton's name down on the first page, but I'm starting to believe somebody besides her is going to make a serious run and win the nomination. Or she is going to Al Gore everyone and have a coronation and I'll look like an idiot for having the right answer and scratching it out. :blush:
 
Lot of speculation on that one, depending on whether she goes for an Obama 2008 supporter or a serious progressive to try to bridge that gap in the party or if she sticks with a loyalist from her 2008 campaign. I can write up something more detailed later if people are interested.
 
What is a pubby prez?

Edit: Republican President? Hmm never heard them called pubby.

Anywho - not a Hilary fan eh?
That voice. Goes right through the brain leaving agony in it's wake. And it'll be fun to watch the partisans here doing a 180 as they did when Bambam took office.

Mind you, my only stake in the matter is to be entertained. And watching the Fox-proxy-pubbies here go nuts over Obama for 8 years with self-inflicted fake outrage has been entertaining.
 
I hate to say it because I'll be accused of being sexist or something, but a lot of our leading lady Senators have annoying voices. Kirsten Gillibrand sounds like she hasn't hit puberty yet, and Kelly Ayotte's voice makes me want to punch a baby.

I'm not quite clear on the 180... were a bunch of progressives apparently satisfied with Obama? Is it on drone or war policy or something?
 
Lot of speculation on that one, depending on whether she goes for an Obama 2008 supporter or a serious progressive to try to bridge that gap in the party or if she sticks with a loyalist from her 2008 campaign. I can write up something more detailed later if people are interested.

Oh yes! Please do!
 
Heh, I forgot about that promise when this thread fell off the first page.

Recently, people have been suggesting the new HUD Secretary (Julian Castro) would be a 2016 VP pick, but I don't think that is realistic. I don't think she would pick Senator Elizabeth Warren either, she wants nothing to do the presidential game. If you look at swing state senators and governors, you come up with a decent list of people to call on--both VA senators (Warner and Kaine), Brown from Ohio, Hickenlooper, Bennet, or Udall from Colorado, Nelson from Florida, Shaheen or Hassan from New Hampshire. Senators Klobuchar and Gillibrand are also floated as potential candidates for president but could be good VPs, although there is a home state conflict if Clinton picks Gilly. Senator Wyden is a longer shot if she wants to appeal to the anti-security state crowd. Governor Deval Patrick has waived off a presidential run but could be on the VP list. I've excluded a couple who are running in tight re-election races now. I'd also assume she'd favor a younger person over someone her age because that's the kind of identity-politics crap the professionals do. So that takes out a few people on that list as well. I would have put Governor Schweitzer (from Montana) on the list before he started his news-commentating career and giving some odd-ball interviews.

I'd suspect the short(-er) list would include a few loyalists who endorsed her early in the 2008 campaign, like Senator Warner, Midwesterners like Senators Brown and Klobuchar in case the GOP makes a strong play for that region, and maybe a guy to reach out to the left like Senator Bennet. The actual pick is a function of who her opponent is and the vetting, so I don't think we could narrow it down further than that.
 
VP selection this early is blind man's bluff really. The primaries will identify the best choice if someone really tries to compete with her...which actually may not happen. Between her electability against the republicans and what I expect will be a strong passing of the torch from Obama this might be the democratic primary season without a significant challenger...they may just line up and push.
 
Back
Top Bottom