2015-2016 Republican Primary Season - Trump Courts the Conservatives

[Thomkal]

well that intro to the candidates shows what a cluster* the Republican Party is these days I guess

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Nonsense. Not only is Rubio going to New Hampshire, he's going to South Carolina and Oklahoma and Arizona and North Dakota and New Mexico, and he's going to California and Texas and New York.... And he's going to South Dakota and Oregon and Washington and Michigan, and then he's going to Washington, D.C., to take back the White House! YEEEAAAAHAHHHAAAA!!!!

Wow, if that happened in the Iowa/NH/SC timeframe, that is indeed all she wrote for Rubio.

[dave731]

Originally Posted by stevew

wtf is this?

Carson never heard his name called because of the initial applause. So he was waiting on his intro that "never came" in his eyes. He obviously didn't want to walk out when they called Ted Cruz. Trump walked out and saw Carson there and prob thought it was some sort of anti-establishment stunt Carson was pulling? Feeling Carson was about to one up his debate snub, Trump decided to hang out with Carson in what was now a political statement the two were making about being Outsiders. So, Trump and Carson are basically Hall and Nash making fun of the WCW from the top of the entrance ramp.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Honestly? I think it's over and Rubio's going to be the candidate.

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Yeah, awful exchange for Rubio.

Well, shit.

Originally Posted by Dutch

If GWB is any indication, we'll be talking about the failures of the Obama administration until 2022 or so...

Let's be serious, here.

GWB: 2 wars, 2 recessions, most significant terrorist attack on American soil, destruction of diplomatic relationships with almost every ally.

Obama: first black president, first real healthcare reform, actual movement on nuclear disarmament with Iran, enshrinement of several progressive social rights.

Those are the things the two presidents will be remembered for in history.

Originally Posted by JAG

I'm surprised someone who's made it to this point could get so destroyed by simply asking what they accomplished and repeating the same canned bit not once, not twice, not three times, but four times in about six minutes.

Given the enormous importance placed on candidates' ability to raise funds these days, especially for national offices, the job now greatly prioritizes an ability to sell over everything else, including an ability to think.

Originally Posted by dave731

Carson never heard his name called because of the initial applause. So he was waiting on his intro that "never came" in his eyes. He obviously didn't want to walk out when they called Ted Cruz. Trump walked out and saw Carson there and prob thought it was some sort of anti-establishment stunt Carson was pulling? Feeling Carson was about to one up his debate snub, Trump decided to hang out with Carson in what was now a political statement the two were making about being Outsiders. So, Trump and Carson are basically Hall and Nash making fun of the WCW from the top of the entrance ramp.

And yet half of the country wants one of these turkeys in the Oval Office.

[cuervo72]

Part of the problem was that ABC had Muir and Raddatz alternating the introductions, with Muir leading. It was tougher to hear Raddatz, plus Carson may have been listening for Muir (Trump was called by Raddatz as well).

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Part of the problem was that ABC had Muir and Raddatz alternating the introductions, with Muir leading. It was tougher to hear Raddatz, plus Carson may have been listening for Muir (Trump was called by Raddatz as well).

To be fair to Carson, he seems to check out about 50% of the time during the debates (I've lost count as to how many times he's asked people to repeat questions), so that he was checked out before the debate doesn't seem to be that surprising.

[PilotMan]

I put that whole mess on the television production even though there is a lot you can take away by reading into it. The candidates just needed to know when to go out and they were let down.

[albionmoonlight]

I find the GOP as a party very interesting. On one level, it is an unstoppable machine. ALEC and associated groups make sure that it dominates state level politics in every state that isn't dark blue. It also has an unbeatable stranglehold on Congress and understands (much better than the Dems) the importance of the judicial branch. And it hasn't just mastered the Super PAC game. It created it. As a liberal, the sheer power and success of the GOP just flat out saddens me.

But that same party can't come up with a competent presidential candidate in an eminently winnable election.

I don't get it.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Let's be serious, here.

GWB: 2 wars, 2 recessions, most significant terrorist attack on American soil, destruction of diplomatic relationships with almost every ally.

Obama: first black president, first real healthcare reform, actual movement on nuclear disarmament with Iran, enshrinement of several progressive social rights.

Those are the things the two presidents will be remembered for in history.

Let's be fair, those are the things that the two presidents will be remembered for by liberals .

By conservatives, GWB will be remembered for getting the country back up after the 9/11 attacks, and fighting terrorists in the MidEast (the bad Iraq War will be minimized). Obama will be remembered for being the first black President, but ACA will be considered by conservatives an example of bad big government and all of the growing pains will be highlighted.

[lighthousekeeper]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

growing pains

I think that's a far cry from how most would characterize it.

[flere-imsaho]

How are moderates going to remember it, Imran?

[QuikSand]

This is the sort of coverage to be expected after Rubio's debate showing:

Christie Gloats After Rubio Knockout - The Daily Beast

[ISiddiqui]

A little bit of (a), a little bit of (b)

Much of it depends on what happens in the near to distant future in the ME and in health care (I mean it's not like Obama's favorability is actually high right now).

[ISiddiqui]

Btw, for comparison's sake, last June, George W. Bush's favorability ratings were 52% favorable...

Poll: More Americans like George W. Bush than dislike - CNNPolitics.com

According to the poll, 52% of adults had a favorable impression of George W. Bush, 43% unfavorable. When Bush left office in 2009, only about a third of Americans said they had a positive opinion of him.

Interesting, I wonder if future folks are going to remember Bush's Presidency as one that attempted to be charitable towards Muslims and immigrants, and that he just looks far better compared to the current crop of GOP politicians.

[stevew]

Neurologist explains why it's hard to look at Ted Cruz's creepy ‘unsettling’ face

[stevew]

Backpfeifengesicht is an awesome word

[lighthousekeeper]

Originally Posted by stevew

“Why do people take such an instant dislike to Ted Cruz?"

"It just saves time.”

[Solecismic]

Making a prediction on New Hampshire is very tough, because there are so many late undecideds (Chris Christie was joking today that shopping must be impossible the day before Christmas in New Hampshire).

I'm reasonably confident Trump will win comfortably. But that's hardly going out on a limb given the polls. There's no doubt he hurt himself skipping the Iowa debate. Polls have asked that question, and the response is overwhelming. It's the first real mistake he made during this campaign.

The race for second is tight. I think this was Rubio's to claim, but we've had three days now where his 25-second sound byte has dominated political news. However, this doesn't benefit Christie. You don't get extra points in politics for someone else's negative. This benefits everyone equally.

So, here's my final prediction:

Trump 31%
Bush 16%
Kasich 16%
Rubio 15%
Cruz 11%
Christie 5%
Fiorina 4%
Carson 2%
Gilmore 0%

Christie and Fiorina will drop out in the next couple of days. Carson will by the end of the month.

[Solecismic]

By the way, if people post their detailed predictions by midnight, I'll tally them up and call a winner here.

[QuikSand]

I'll go with the "puff of smoke" theory for Rubio here:

Trump 34%
Kasich 18%
Bush 12%
Christie 11%
Cruz 10%
Rubio 10%
Fiorina 2%
Carson 2%
Gilmore 0%

[tarcone]

Trump 25%
Christie 18%
Kasich 17%
Rubio 14%
Bush 11%
Cruz 11%
Fiorina 3%
Carson 1%
Gilmore 0%

[JonInMiddleGA]

Did Carson ever make it up to NH?

(yes, I'm actually asking, it's not just a one-liner)

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

By the way, if people post their detailed predictions by midnight, I'll tally them up and call a winner here.

Can someone quote me below so Jim sees my predictions?

Overall I agree with Jim's analysis, though I don't think Christie is dropping out yet. Carson might, though. Here are my predictions:

Trump - 25%
Kasich - 17%
Bush - 15%
Rubio - 10%
Cruz - 10%
Christie - 5%
Fiorina - 4%
Carson - 2%

[JPhillips]

Trump 26
Rubio 15
Kasich 15
Cruz 14
Bush 12
Christie 7
Fiorina 2
Carson 3
Other 6

The ballot in NH is a damn mess. That's why I have an other category for all the other candidates.

Manchester Sample Ballot

[vex]

Rubio 24
Trump 21
Kasich 17
Cruz 13
Bush 11
Christie 7
Carson 5
Fiorina 2

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

The ballot in NH is a damn mess. That's why I have an other category for all the other candidates.

You ain't kiddin'. I'm betting Jindal gets a good number of votes....

[JPhillips]

Rubio today.

[panerd]

So Bloomberg...

Would he not hurt Clinton way more than the Republican candidate? Seems like he would enter more to keep a Trump/Cruz out of office but maybe he just sees a chance to be president?

On the flip side I feel like a Trump/Bloomberg/Sanders race is focused solely on the billionaires vs. the "Working man". A very scary thought for me personally.

[corbes]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

The ballot in NH is a damn mess.
Manchester Sample Ballot

Let's hear it for Andy Martin of Manchester, NH!

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by panerd

So Bloomberg...

Would he not hurt Clinton way more than the Republican candidate? Seems like he would enter more to keep a Trump/Cruz out of office but maybe he just sees a chance to be president?

On the flip side I feel like a Trump/Bloomberg/Sanders race is focused solely on the billionaires vs. the "Working man". A very scary thought for me personally.

I think he would hurt Clinton more if only because of his gun control stance will turn off many on the right.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I think he would hurt Clinton more if only because of his gun control stance will turn off many on the right.

I admit to not knowing a lot of details of his policy views (and would assume as a Mayor that he wouldn't have set in stone foreign policy/trade views) but I have to say the Big Gulp ban seems like it would make quite the sound bite for both Democrats and Republicans.

[larrymcg421]

Republicans will view Bloomberg as a Democrat. They won't give a shit that he previously ran as a Republican. Maybe he takes some Republican votes from the suburbs, but the votes he'll really steal are from Democrats who don't like Hillary or left leaning moderates who think Bernie is too far to the left. Bloomberg ensures a Republican victory.

[Ben E Lou]

I thought I read somewhere that he was/is only planning to run if it looks like a Trump vs. Sanders from the big two parties.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I thought I read somewhere that he was/is only planning to run if it looks like a Trump vs. Sanders from the big two parties.

That's his best chance for winning, but I still think Trump wins that scenario, especially since he wins any scenario where nobody gets 270 electoral votes.

[Ben E Lou]

[cuervo72]

Yeah, that's a fair question. I can't see myself voting for Trump and absolutely won't vote for Cruz, but I don't see myself voting for Clinton or Sanders either. Bloomberg, maybe. He's not perfect (seriously, let idiots drink gallon sodas if they want) but I think I can look past his flaws more than I could the other candidates.

Of course I am a registered Republican in one of the bluest states out there, so it doesn't really matter in my case. I wonder how many more like me there might be, and where they are.

[rowech]

Bloomberg is 74. No chance of him winning.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

That's his best chance for winning, but I still think Trump wins that scenario, especially since he wins any scenario where nobody gets 270 electoral votes.

Does he? I mean the House can, if it decides to, vote for anyone it wants.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Does he? I mean the House can, if it decides to, vote for anyone it wants.

It's hard to imagine Trump winning the nomination with the R powers that be in the House being so against him, but it's even harder to imagine that they'd vote someone else in other than the Republican nominee.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Does he? I mean the House can, if it decides to, vote for anyone it wants.

Nope. I addressed this earlier. The house has to pick from the top three electoral vote getters.

Per the 12th Amendment:

The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.

[digamma]

You should have kept highlighting. The other key is that the House votes by state.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by digamma

You should have kept highlighting. The other key is that the House votes by state.

Well the GOP wins that either way and I doubt anything that happens in the 2016 congressional elections will change that much, even with a toxic Trump running.

[digamma]

I agree. The point though is that even in a three way race, the Republican has an even bigger advantage because you can't create a third party coalition among the larger house constituency.

[ISiddiqui]

Hmm, well if it comes down to Bloomberg, Sanders, or Trump in the House... there is a chance that Bloomberg could take it... its likely his best chance, to be honest.

[QuikSand]

Seems totally appropriate here.

[cartman]

Lloyd/Harry 2016

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I thought I read somewhere that he was/is only planning to run if it looks like a Trump vs. Sanders from the big two parties.

That's what I read, too. And it makes logical sense. The article I read made it clear that Bloomberg would only enter the race if he had a legitimate chance of winning, and the only scenario that really fits that is Trump vs. Sanders.

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

It's hard to imagine Trump winning the nomination with the R powers that be in the House being so against him, but it's even harder to imagine that they'd vote someone else in other than the Republican nominee.

Given a choice between Trump, Sanders & Bloomberg I think the House probably makes Paul Ryan President.

[Arles]

All signs appear to point to a Trump landslide in New Hampshire. We will see if his polling corresponds to votes this time.

[panerd]

So you would have two of the top 100 richest people in America (one whose net worth is basically Wall Street) against a guy who's platform is anti-Wall Street/Big Money? I bet Sanders inner circle is champing at the bit for that match up.

[stevew]

Bloomberg has to start getting in by next month I read. And some states are really hard to get on the ballot