• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Republicans 2016

WhipperSnapper

WhipperSnapper

Lifer
Maybe I'm putting the cart before the horse, but who will the Republicans run in 2016? Will they have another circus convention? With Romney out of the picture, will they offer up a Christian Taliban candidate like Santorum, Palin, Aiken, or Bachman? Or will they offer a 1% candidate like Ryan? Is there any chance that they could find a candidate that might appeal to those who aren't Christian Taliban or members of the top 5%? Would they dare to run a candidate who's last name is Bush?
 
Last edited:
Todd33 said:
The fat guy?
Click to expand...

From what little I've seen of him, he does seem to be a pretty likeable guy and I suspect that he has for more political sense than Romney. He might be a big fat guy (for now until the gastric bypass kicks in), but I doubt he'll trip over his own feet like Romeny.

But could he win the nomination?
 
I had thought after the Bush disaster, that the GOP would have to go through a long rebuilding.

Basically I thought that the party would go more extreme and "burn away all the impurities" like a crucible, fall to irrelevancy, push those people aside and then rebuild on that.

I still think we are the lingering stages of phase I, altho I have no idea how long it will take. I do think the resurgence will come much faster than expected when it does come.

The big problem for the GOP is it lacks cohesive ideology and purpose.

They are in the twilight of the Reagan Revolution, but Reagan is slipping into a historical figure and not a feature of modern politics. Reagan has little meaning or memory for those under 40, as Kennedy is to many Dems of today. Its fine to quote him, but there are no ideas there.

The current leadership has not founded a new ideology, and is just recycling the fights of the 80's and 90's. The GOP won't evolve until a new class of leaders steps forward.
 
The GOP needs a moderate face to run for election. I honestly think Jeb Bush needs to run for office. The man is nothing like his brother, and he gets such a bad rap for his name....but I see him as a true conservative who is capable of bipartisanship. He avoids nasty rhetoric, and he comes across as a truely likeable and intelligent candidate.
 
The Republican party needs to split into the Insanity Party and the Conservative Business Party and run separate candidates so the Democrats can split into the Democratic Business Centrist Party and the Progressive Party. So long as we can't get a progressive voice in America we will continue to deteriorate.
 
Ryan said:
The GOP needs a moderate face to run for election. I honestly think Jeb Bush needs to run for office. The man is nothing like his brother, and he gets such a bad rap for his name....but I see him as a true conservative who is capable of bipartisanship. He avoids nasty rhetoric, and he comes across as a truely likeable and intelligent candidate.
Click to expand...

Romney is a pretty moderate conservative as well. I actually think he'd do a decent job as president if left to his own devices. Problem is, the party he needs to rally, threaten and generally give orders to is obstinate and unreasonable, and so like most politicians would he decided to sell out those positions and start saying the things that would get him the nomination. Now he's stuck, and so will be the candidate of 2016.
 
Ryan said:
The GOP needs a moderate face to run for election. I honestly think Jeb Bush needs to run for office. The man is nothing like his brother, and he gets such a bad rap for his name....but I see him as a true conservative who is capable of bipartisanship. He avoids nasty rhetoric, and he comes across as a truely likeable and intelligent candidate.
Click to expand...

That would make...3 Bushs who either served in office or who were finalist candidates for President. The irony is that the Republicans claim that we live in a land of fair opportunity for all and of meritocracy--yet out of 310 million people, 3 of the most recent finalist presidential candidates would have been from the same family--like a monarchy--which seems to fly in the face of their claim about meritocracy.
 
yllus said:
Romney is a pretty moderate conservative as well. I actually think he'd do a decent job as president if left to his own devices. Problem is, the party he needs to rally, threaten and generally give orders to is obstinate and unreasonable, and so like most politicians would he decided to sell out those positions and start saying the things that would get him the nomination. Now he's stuck, and so will be the candidate of 2016.
Click to expand...

I feel the same way. I suspect that if he were left alone and weren't influenced by the Republicans that he would be a decent moderate who might even be able to pass for a Democrat. I really don't dislike Romney, at least not as I think he would be if he were left to his own devices. My opposition to him is that if he were elected, it would result in the empowerment of the rest of the Republican Party.
 
WhipperSnapper said:
That would make...3 Bushs who either served in office or who were finalist candidates for President. The irony is that the Republicans claim that we live in a land of fair opportunity for all and of meritocracy--yet out of 310 million people, 3 of the most recent finalist presidential candidates would have been from the same family--like a monarchy--which seems to fly in the face of their claim about meritocracy.
Click to expand...

Eh - it personally doesn't bother me. I also would like to see Hillary Clinton run for office in 2016.
 
Bitek said:
I had thought after the Bush disaster, that the GOP would have to go through a long rebuilding.

Basically I thought that the party would go more extreme and "burn away all the impurities" like a crucible, fall to irrelevancy, push those people aside and then rebuild on that.

I still think we are the lingering stages of phase I, altho I have no idea how long it will take. I do think the resurgence will come much faster than expected when it does come.

The big problem for the GOP is it lacks cohesive ideology and purpose.

They are in the twilight of the Reagan Revolution, but Reagan is slipping into a historical figure and not a feature of modern politics. Reagan has little meaning or memory for those under 40, as Kennedy is to many Dems of today. Its fine to quote him, but there are no ideas there.

The current leadership has not founded a new ideology, and is just recycling the fights of the 80's and 90's. The GOP won't evolve until a new class of leaders steps forward.
Click to expand...
For the last 20 years both parties have wholeheartedly believed they were only 1-2 elections away from really delivering a knockout blow and starting a new era of political dominance. I can envision the GOP actually going into long-term rebuilding mode if they lose this election, but I also wouldn't be so quick to discount the fanatical zeal of the Tea Party or the ungodly amount of money that Citizens United has allowed people like Adelson, the Kochs, etc to inject into politics. Those guys will not go down so easily, and even if the GOP doesn't take the presidency and Senate, they will probably still control the House, not to mention the Supreme Court.

I disagree that the GOP lacks cohesiveness, that has really been their historical strength and they still have a much more homogeneous base than Democrats' strange coalition of minorities, blue collar unions, gays, civil rights activists, and college-educated women. The problem is that their ideology is composed of increasingly radical social policies that has minimal appeal to new voters at the same time that demographic changes are reducing their share of support in the general population.
 
I'm going to say it will be a white guy who talks about God, guns and gays nonstop. It would be nice to have a moderate who can say what he wants and not pander to crazies. Of course that kind of guy would never survive the primaries (Huntsman).



nehalem256 said:
Isn't there like a 40% chance it will be Mitt Romney?
Click to expand...

Now or 2016? Now it is at ~25% and probably dropping fast.
 
Ryan said:
Eh - it personally doesn't bother me. I also would like to see Hillary Clinton run for office in 2016.
Click to expand...

It's just kind of ironic that the political party that claims or at least implies that we have a meritocracy where people have what they have because they earned it and worked hard for it would do something that would provide blatant contradictory evidence against it.

Part of their argument, by implication, is that it's wrong to tax the rich because they worked hard and earned their money and people get to where they are in life through hard work and effort. Yet 3 people from the same family would have been finalist candidates for the highest job title in the land. If our economy and social structure were the way they claim it is, what would be the chances of that happening in a nation of 310 million people?
 
Ryan said:
The GOP needs a moderate face to run for election. I honestly think Jeb Bush needs to run for office. The man is nothing like his brother, and he gets such a bad rap for his name....but I see him as a true conservative who is capable of bipartisanship. He avoids nasty rhetoric, and he comes across as a truely likeable and intelligent creature.
Click to expand...

You just described my dog.
 
yllus said:
Romney is a pretty moderate conservative as well. I actually think he'd do a decent job as president if left to his own devices. Problem is, the party he needs to rally, threaten and generally give orders to is obstinate and unreasonable, and so like most politicians would he decided to sell out those positions and start saying the things that would get him the nomination. Now he's stuck, and so will be the candidate of 2016.
Click to expand...

romney is no Conservative, his views are very progressive and he could easily run for the democrats.

He is the same as obama and bush since there all corrupt and serve special interests

The republicans had a chance with Ron Paul and those idiots screwed up, this was the real Conservative and he brought in new blood along with wider demographics which they desperately need
 
Bloomberg/Christie 2016 would be an unstoppable force. I am pretty much a hardcore Liberal voter and I would gladly vote for this combo.
 
The republican party is the party of lincoln, it does not change... when are enough people going to try to quite changing it? I'm also doubtful that there will even be an election here in 2016. The war against Iran, russia, and china will be the last war of the u.s. Federalist republic because it's going to collapse under its own weight. What happens after that, I don't know, but things are going to get worse before they get better.

I've always hated the Republican party anyway for always allowing an absolute majority to control the party while the Democrats at least used to require 2/3.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top