Romney 2016 or Obama 2016

[techs]

Will the loser be be back in 2016 running again?

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Definitely not in either case.

 

[MovingTarget]

Biden/Clinton 2016.

 

[techs]

Clinton/Biden 2016.

ftfy

 

[Thump553]

Romney-definately not. His time has come and gone and he doesn't have any core constituency at all. He's attracting support as the anti-Obama, not because anyone (outside of a few fools) actually believe anything he says. Besides he would be facing a field of real contenders in 2016 instead of the pack of jokers he smoked this time around.

Obama-it's possible, I suppose-but if Hillary runs it will be her for sure this time. Frankly I doubt Obama would run against Hillary in 2016, he'd wait until 2020, he's a young guy and I doubt she wants two terms at her age.

 

[Jhhnn]

Obama can't serve more than 2 terms, by law, and that won't change.

The only modern president who was previously defeated as a candidate was Nixon, and Romney is no Nixon. If he can't win now, he'll never win.

Hillary might run. She'll be 69, the same age as Reagan when he won in 1980.

Repubs? They're still looking for Colbert's mythical "Rick Parry", somebody who'll sell to the fringe-y base & the rest of America, too. He'll be tough to find, being a contradiction in terms & a figment of their imaginations...

 

[SheHateMe]

Obama can't serve more than 2 terms, by law, and that won't change.

The only modern president who was previously defeated as a candidate was Nixon, and Romney is no Nixon. If he can't win now, he'll never win.

Hillary might run. She'll be 69, the same age as Reagan when he won in 1980.

Repubs? They're still looking for Colbert's mythical "Rick Parry", somebody who'll sell to the fringe-y base & the rest of America, too. He'll be tough to find, being a contradiction in terms & a figment of their imaginations...

69 is a good number.

 

[DrPizza]

Christie vs. Clinton 2016

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Neither

 

[techs]

Bachmann/Palin 2016

 

[SheHateMe]

Bachmann/Palin 2016

:'(

 

[techs]

Bachmann/Palin 2016

:'(

OK, Palin/Bachmann

 

[Kadarin]

Santorum/Huckabee - We'll turn into a religious theocracy.

 

[a777pilot]

Definitely not in either case.

this ^^^^^^^^

 

[a777pilot]

Christie vs. Clinton 2016

Christie......I know few Conservatives that support the Second Amendment that would give him the time of day. That includes me.

Clinton......Benghazi has derailed any chance she might have had to run.

 

[nextJin]

No

 

[Doppel]

No, the republicans will finally have learned their lesson with Romney. Trying him again would be even more retarded than trying him once.

 

[umbrella39]

Christie vs. Clinton 2016

<peeks out between fern>Very interesting...</peeks out between fern>

 

[berzerker60]

No, the republicans will finally have learned their lesson with Romney. Trying him again would be even more retarded than trying him once.

The problem is, I'm not sure they're going to learn the RIGHT lessons. If all the GOP takes from this is "Romney wasn't conservative enough!!!" then we're all in for a rough ride until the GOP has to reconfigure its platform pretty radically because Texas has flipped blue.

2016 could well be Clinton vs. Bush.

 

[nageov3t]

Nixon running again after losing the Presidential election was the exception, not the rule.

it's kinda like trying out for a reality show (hell, maybe exactly like trying out for a reality show)... a lot of people run in the preliminary/interview rounds multiple times, but once you make it to the final rounds, you've only got one chance,

 

[a777pilot]

No, the republicans will finally have learned their lesson with Romney. Trying him again would be even more retarded than trying him once.

In the past little over 100 years both parties have tried to run the same person again after a loss. It didn't work out well either time.

Thomas Dewey in '44 & '48.

Adlie Stevenson in '52 & '56.

 

[Doppel]

In the past little over 100 years both parties have tried to run the same person again after a loss. It didn't work out well either time.

Thomas Dewey in '44 & '48.

Adlie Stevenson in '52 & '56.

Thanks I did wonder the stats behind it. Also Romney did get a lot of attention in 2008. We have almost certainly seen the last of him after he is summarily beaten on Tuesday.

 

[a777pilot]

Thanks I did wonder the stats behind it. Also Romney did get a lot of attention in 2008. We have almost certainly seen the last of him after he is summarily beaten on Tuesday.

To quote a line from a movie: "We shall see", says the Zen master.

 

[Balt]

Definitely not in either case.

Agreed. They are both done.

That said, I have no idea who the Dems will run with in 2016. I don't get the feeling from Secretary Clinton that she's going to be interested. I think she'll probably be resigning after Obama is re-elected, tbh (I think all of the traveling has worn her down).

I can think of a few likely Republican candidates, though. Christie is the rather obvious and most likely of them.

 

[nageov3t]

Agreed. They are both done.

That said, I have no idea who the Dems will run with in 2016. I can think of a few likely Republican candidates, though.

assuming Hillary doesn't run, I'd guess Biden and Cuomo fighting it out for the establishment support.