Most # of major Presidential candidates in generations

[JEDI]

for 2016 pres.

no so much for the dems, but Repubs are coming out of the woodwork announcing.

There's like a dozen major names and will grow by at least 1.
ie: Jeb hasn't formally announced yet.


this will give us a glimpse on how far right from the center the repub membership have moved based on whoever they elect as the repub nominee.

 

[cabri]

That is what the primaries are for - remove the dreamers from those that have the stamina to go the distance.

Usually, when your party has the WH; there is minimal opposition.
either the president is up for re-election, the VP is the heir appointee or in this case the previous runner up has the inside track and the party elite have anointed the candidate.

 

[blastingcap]

That is what the primaries are for - remove the dreamers from those that have the stamina to go the distance.

In practice it makes everyone pander to the extremists and then have to backtrack a bit in the general election to appeal to centrists.

 

[PokerGuy]

So many candidates, yet as a country we can't seem to elect any qualified leaders. There is still some uncertainty about who will be the repub candidate, but I'm pretty confident that regardless of which person wins the repub nomination, we're pretty much guaranteed to get another lousy "leader" , regardless of (D) or (R) behind their name. It's more a differentiation between lousy and very lousy.

 

[JEDI]

That is what the primaries are for - remove the dreamers from those that have the stamina to go the distance.

Usually, when your party has the WH; there is minimal opposition.
either the president is up for re-election, the VP is the heir appointee or in this case the previous runner up has the inside track and the party elite have anointed the candidate.

I don't think Biden will run for pres else he would have announced by now?

this will make it 2 in a row where the sitting VP isn't running for Pres after the current Pres's 2nd term is up.
other one was Cheney

 

[nageov3t]

definitely have to take into account the number of Republicans who sat on their hands in 2012 because Obama looked unbeatable... otoh, in 2016, as much as the demographics and electoral map favors the Democrats, it is pretty rare for a single party to keep the White House for 3 terms.

 

[JEDI]

So many candidates, yet as a country we can't seem to elect any qualified leaders. There is still some uncertainty about who will be the repub candidate, but I'm pretty confident that regardless of which person wins the repub nomination, we're pretty much guaranteed to get another lousy "leader" , regardless of (D) or (R) behind their name. It's more a differentiation between lousy and very lousy.

i don't mind Bill Clinton for a 3rd term.
i liked him during the 1st two terms. We had a surplus and not national debt under him.

 

[PokerGuy]

i don't mind Bill Clinton for a 3rd term.
i liked him during the 1st two terms. We had a surplus and not national debt under him.

Well, for one, you're not getting Bill Clinton, you're getting hildabeast. Bill tends to be remembered fondly because the economy was growing during the 90's as the internet really became a big force, but lets not forget that for a good part of his presidency he was forced to work with a republican congress. IMO the best set up is to have the white house be one party and congress be the other, they are either forced to work together or nothing gets done. Either way we are better off than one party having more power.

 

[dank69]

Well, for one, you're not getting Bill Clinton, you're getting hildabeast. Bill tends to be remembered fondly because the economy was growing during the 90's as the internet really became a big force, but lets not forget that for a good part of his presidency he was forced to work with a republican congress. IMO the best set up is to have the white house be one party and congress be the other, they are either forced to work together or nothing gets done. Either way we are better off than one party having more power.

No, because "work together" has meant "do what Republicans want" for as long as I can remember, which is almost as bad as having GOP control over everything. "Work together" has gotten us NAFTA, repeal of Glass-Steagall, etc.

Full Dem control got us Obamacare, which has become the opposite of the disaster the GOP has been screaming it would be.

 

[PokerGuy]

No, because "work together" has meant "do what Republicans want" for as long as I can remember, which is almost as bad as having GOP control over everything. "Work together" has gotten us NAFTA, repeal of Glass-Steagall, etc.

Full Dem control got us Obamacare, which has become the opposite of the disaster the GOP has been screaming it would be.

Hey, whatever delusional beliefs float your boat, have at it.

 

[hal2kilo]

Gee, let me guess. It couldn't be because there's just gobs of unaccounted for money floating around because of the idiot SCOTUS ruling on Citizens United.

 

[soundforbjt]

That is what the primaries are for - remove the dreamers from those that have the money to go the distance.

fixed that for ya...

 

[blastingcap]

So many candidates, yet as a country we can't seem to elect any qualified leaders. There is still some uncertainty about who will be the repub candidate, but I'm pretty confident that regardless of which person wins the repub nomination, we're pretty much guaranteed to get another lousy "leader" , regardless of (D) or (R) behind their name. It's more a differentiation between lousy and very lousy.

I would be in favor of the USA switching to a parliamentary system.

 

[PokerGuy]

I would be in favor of the USA switching to a parliamentary system.

Might not be a horrible idea, but it's probably no worse than the crappy two party setup we have now.

 

[werepossum]

So many candidates, yet as a country we can't seem to elect any qualified leaders. There is still some uncertainty about who will be the repub candidate, but I'm pretty confident that regardless of which person wins the repub nomination, we're pretty much guaranteed to get another lousy "leader" , regardless of (D) or (R) behind their name. It's more a differentiation between lousy and very lousy.

Or between very lousy and also very lousy.

Hey, it's a democratic republic. We get the leadership we deserve.

I don't think Biden will run for pres else he would have announced by now?

this will make it 2 in a row where the sitting VP isn't running for Pres after the current Pres's 2nd term is up.
other one was Cheney

In all fairness, you can't really blame Cheney. His heart was far too weak to handle all that laughter mixed with hysterical screams.

BTW, is "the center" the Hildabeast or Bernie Sanders?

I would be in favor of the USA switching to a parliamentary system.

Sadly, I too would support that. Wouldn't be all rainbows and unicorns though - in a nation this size we'd probably have a KKK rep and a Black Panther rep.

 

[MongGrel]

Rick Perry decided WTF and just threw it out there is what this all about I guess.

I still have a problem with the whole system.

I mean really, Jeb is just sucking up money legally through political organizations to the max while saying he isn't a candidate ???

Anyone see a problem there even, the guy says he isn't running yet but still sucking money up to run, in public, with no restrictions at all.

Yeah Jeb, we don't really know you're going to announce it,on June 15th or whatever the date is, just screw with the system as much as ya can till then.

 

[MongGrel]

I might vote Communist yet, when ya can't beat em, join em 😛

 

[werepossum]

Rick Perry decided WTF and just threw it out there is what this all about I guess.

I still have a problem with the whole system.

I mean really, Jeb is just sucking up money legally through political organizations to the max while saying he isn't a candidate ???

Anyone see a problem there even, the guy says he isn't running yet but still sucking money up to run, in public, with no restrictions at all.

Yeah Jeb, we don't really know you're going to announce it,on June 15th or whatever the date is, just screw with the system as much as ya can till then.

In fairness to Rick Perry, he may not yet have actually realized that the last election cycle is over. It may have taken him the last three years to remember his platform. Or, you know, tattoo it on his arm.

 

[DrDoug]

Rick Perry decided WTF and just threw it out there is what this all about I guess.

I still have a problem with the whole system.

I mean really, Jeb is just sucking up money legally through political organizations to the max while saying he isn't a candidate ???

Anyone see a problem there even, the guy says he isn't running yet but still sucking money up to run, in public, with no restrictions at all.

...

The problem for Republicans is that they catered to their base for decades and never quite gave them what they wanted. Now that the crazies in the party are well in to taking it over, combine that with a party awash in cash from the CU decision plus the fools that willingly part with their money for the latest crusade and you have a bunch of name-dropping money grubbers who want to get their slice of the Republican fame and fortune pie. Most of these candidates know that they don't stand a chance of winning anything except for some cold, hard cash and airtime on Fox 'News', which is exactly what they are aiming for. $$$$$ and face time on the news so they can prove to themselves how important and significant they are to America.

They know the grift train is passing through the station and they intend to get on, enjoy the ride and leave with their chunk of cash.

Either way, it's win-win for them.

 

[sportage]

True! A lot of democrats believe voting for Hillary means a Bill Clinton 3rd term (followed by a Bill Clinton 4th).
And that's fine with me. Whatever it takes.
They say, behind every great man is a great woman.
So...? Whats the problem?
If Bill's success was motivated thru Hillary, well then, now we have the chance to elect the heart of the matter.
Kind of like cutting out the middle man.

 

[JEDI]

The problem for Republicans is that they catered to their base for decades and never quite gave them what they wanted. Now that the crazies in the party are well in to taking it over, combine that with a party awash in cash from the CU decision plus the fools that willingly part with their money for the latest crusade and you have a bunch of name-dropping money grubbers who want to get their slice of the Republican fame and fortune pie. Most of these candidates know that they don't stand a chance of winning anything except for some cold, hard cash and airtime on Fox 'News', which is exactly what they are aiming for. $$$$$ and face time on the news so they can prove to themselves how important and significant they are to America.

They know the grift train is passing through the station and they intend to get on, enjoy the ride and leave with their chunk of cash.

Either way, it's win-win for them.

huh?
candidates get paid by the superpacs when they run??