Wednesday, January 30, 2013

14 Republicans who might run in 2016....What do you think?

CSM came up with a list of 14 GOP hopefuls for 2016 and provide commentary on what 'they' feel are their strengths/weaknesses:
The 2012 presidential election had barely ended when jockeying by Republicans began for 2016. The GOP has a history of nominating people who have run before, which could give heart to some familiar faces. But there’s also a crop of young rising stars who could steal the show, including Mitt Romney’s running mate and a certain Cuban-American senator from Florida.
Some on the list include:

1. Marco Rubio:
....Rubio is the son of Cuban immigrants, and could help the GOP recover from Mr. Romney’s poor showing among Latinos (though not all Latinos feel warmly toward Cuban-Americans, who have special immigration status). Still, pride among Latinos that one of their own could become president might override reservations. Rubio has been a leader in the Senate on immigration reform, and Latinos have welcomed his calls for compassion.....
2. Paul Ryan:
...On the plus side for Ryan is his elevated status among the party faithful, his better-than-expected stump performance in 2012 – he didn’t lapse much into wonky budget talk – and his sunny youthfulness. By 2016, being a member of Generation X won’t be a negative: He will be about the same age Barack Obama and Bill Clinton were when they were elected president....
10. Bob McDonnell:
....Part of McDonnell’s appeal for 2016 may be his ability to straddle both the mainstream and conservative worlds. When he first took over as governor, he supported a requirement that a woman have a transvaginal ultrasound before an abortion. Faced with an uproar, he switched to support for a less invasive abdominal ultrasound....
To find out the other 11, go HERE.

Note: the format is a slide show. look for the arrow next to the heading for each hopefull.

If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook here.
Please follow us on Twitter here.

32 comments:

Anonymous said...

One name you won't see on the list is Sarah.

Palin, in short, began to believe everything that her most ardent supporters thought about her. (It’s dangerous for any politician to believe what your biggest fan thinks of you; you need to appeal to voters who are not your biggest fans, and even to some of your enemies, to win elections.)

She became bigger than politics — in her own mind — and began to focus much more on the celebrity side of her persona (the various reality shows, her daughter, Bristol, on “Dancing with the Stars”) than on the political end. Stories of her refusing to confirm or canceling her involvement in party events became legion. Eventually, GOP fundraisers stopped asking Palin to be involved because the bang they got from her name being on an invite didn’t make up for the chaos she and her entourage guaranteed.

Anonymous said...

Only 2 people on that list interest me; Ryan and McDonnell.

Rubio - likable, but without serious qualifications.

Christie - a traitor who lacks judgment.
Santorum - gag.
Huckabee - Seems to have no interest.
Jindal - only good on paper.
Jeb - I don't know. Maybe.
Scott Walker - rubs me the wrong way.
Marinez - I believe her when she says she doesn't want it.
Ayote - No opinion yet.

None of these people are capable of overcoming the media bias, or the voters misguided priorities, IMO.

-Martha

Anonymous said...

How is democrat Chris Christie going to run for the GOP nomination ????

newark hawk said...

53% of votes cast in the 2012 election cycle were cast by females.

Romney-Ryan lost the female vote by 12 points, 56%-44%.

The GOP must strengthen its appeal to female voters if it ever hopes to regain the presidency.

The quickest and easiest way for the GOP to accomplish this goal is to put a female on the GOP ticket.

For this very reason, prior to the selection of Paul Ryan, I repeatedly suggested that Romney pick Nikki Haley or Michele Bachmann as his running mate.

Haley and Bachmann also possessed the added advantage of appealing to social conservatives, which Ryan never did, as shown by the low turnout of social conservatives on November 6th.

When John McCain selected Sarah Palin as his running mate in 2008, his poll numbers soared, but then plummeted after Palin performed so poorly in several national TV interviews.

Haley and Bachmann are far more articulate, intelligent, qualified and conservative than Palin ever was.

Either one would have been a superb running mate for Romney, and would be as well for whomever the 2016 GOP presidential nominee turns out to be.

newark hawk said...

It's the female vote, stupid.

Anonymous said...

If all it is is a women on the ticket, How did Obama and Biden do it twice.

Anonymous said...

Newark, Michelle Bachmann is too much of a target for the dumb things she does on occasion. I agree she is articulate, and well informed. But she has these little side issues that would have blown up.

Haley is also still a wild card, although I really like her.

I can see the possibility of Martinez because she is a tough lady. But I don't know enough about her to make a judgment yet. Wouldn't it be nice to see her take on Hillary?

-Martha

Anonymous said...

Martinez would be interesting on the ticket, although I don't know too much about her, either. Being a governor is a good start for anyone, though.

AZ

RomneyMan said...

"For this very reason, prior to the selection of Paul Ryan, I repeatedly suggested that Romney pick Nikki Haley or Michele Bachmann as his running mate. " lol

newark hawk said...

@ Anonymous 1:27 PM - OBVIOUSLY, the Democrats don't need a female on the ticket to appeal to female voters. The GOP does. Capiche???

@ Martha - What did Bachmann say or do that was so dumb? Need I remind you that Romney said MANY dumb things during the campaign which Team Obama had a field day with. Every politician says dumb things on occasion, including some of your favorites.

@ Romneyman - You have a strange sense of humor. Very strange.

Anonymous said...

Newark, I don't remember Romney saying anything dumb. He might have been inartful, but no outright gaffes. 47% was the worst, but it was true.

Michelle Bachmann is too volatile, plus she had some real humdingers in the debates, but since she was a long shot, she got away with no one fact checking her. No one much cared. If she had been the VP, oh my what a field day.

-Martha

Anonymous said...

Newark, I don't even think Rice could have made the difference, but she might have. We'll never know because the right goes ballistic about her, and threatens and all that.

-Martha

Anonymous said...

Anyone but Christie, Jindal, or Bush.

newark hawk said...

@ Martha

I'm still waiting to hear your specific examples of Michele Bachmann's dumb statements or remarks. Please enlighten me.

As for Romney, well, you asked for it:

"I like being able to fire people."

"I'm not concerned about the very poor."

"Corporations are people, my friend, of course they are."

"47% of the people will vote for Obama no matter what. They are dependent upon government. They believe they are victims. They believe that government has a responsibility to care for them. They believe they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it. My job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility for their lives."

"We had binders of women."

"I'll tell you what, ten-thousand bucks? $10,000 bet?"

"My wife Ann drives a couple of Cadillacs."

"I like those fancy raincoats you bought. Really sprung for the big bucks."(Romney speaking to NASCAR fans wearing plastic ponchos at the Daytona 500.)

"It's not worth moving heaven and earth, spending billions of dollars, just trying to catch one person."(Romney speaking in 2007 about America's pursuit of Osama bin Laden.)

"I get speaker's fees from time to time, but not very much."($374,000 in one year is not very much?!?)

"It's hard to know just how well the London Olympics will turn out. There were a few things that were disconcerting. The stories about the private security firm not having enough people. The supposed strike of the immigration and customs officials. That obviously is not encouraging."(Romney, on the eve of the 2012 Summer Olympics, criticizing Britain's preparation for the event.)

The list goes on ...

Anonymous said...

Newark, you've got to be kidding. None of those are gaffes. You sound like a liberal.

I'm not going to go out and find Bachmann's problems. She means nothing to anyone and never did. But I think I speak for the crowd when I say she is somewhat of a nutjob.

-Martha

Anonymous said...

Well, each of those statements sounds stupid,when taken out of context. Romney lost the 'woman's vote because of single and stupid women. Married women voted Romney. Smart women voted Romney. but you put free Birth Control and state funded abortion on the table, and the single women with no morals come out in droves. Some even multiple times. We don't need a person who only appeals to a certain demographic. We need someone who can carry the load. Ryan was an excellent pick. ellie.

Anonymous said...

Some people on this site have a selected memory of history. McCain's poll numbers dropped when he suspended his campaign, not when Palin, "flubbed," an interview. The exit polling proved that Palin was a net positive to his campaign.

jerseyrepublican

newark hawk said...

@ Martha

Your infatuation with Mitt Romney has blinded you to reality.

Any objective observer would agree that the gaffes I listed were SEVERELY DAMAGING to Romney's campaign.

"Denial", as Mark Twain famously wrote, "ain't just a river in Egypt."

RomneyMan said...

"@ Romneyman - You have a strange sense of humor. Very strange."

Impeach/newmark, or whatever you're calling yourself this week: A Romney/Bachmann combination is enough to make a baby laugh. Many may see why I scratch my head at the *expert* comments and ideas that many on the board come up with- I mean, these are the same folks that had Romney winning the election, the UFO bad losr conspiracy theories afterwards.

Anonymous said...

Palin was bad news from day one. And not in a good way either. She has no future in politics, but I can see her turning letters on a TV show, but only IF she learns the alphabet.

newark hawk said...

@ jersey republican

McCain's poll numbers dropped after he suspended his campaign AND after Palin's interview with Katie Couric.

I do agree that Palin was a net positive for McCain's campaign, but that doesn't refute the fact that Palin's poor performance during several national TV interviews hurt the GOP ticket in 2008.

newark hawk said...

@ RomneyMan

Not only do you have a very strange sense of humor, you seem to be delusional as well.

Next time you visit your shrink, tell him he needs to up the dosage. Immediately.

newark hawk said...

@ Ellie

"Paul Ryan was an excellent pick"???

He couldn't even put his home state of Wisconsin - a very winnable swing state - in the GOP column.

Blaming "stupid" and "immoral" voters for an election loss is the last resort of a loser.

newark hawk said...

@ Martha

And BTW, you do NOT "speak for the crowd."

The "crowd" just re-elected Bachmann to Congress despite an ALL-OUT EFFORT by the Dems to defeat her.

*the* RomneyMan said...

"@ RomneyMan

Not only do you have a very strange sense of humor, you seem to be delusional as well.

Next time you visit your shrink, tell him he needs to up the dosage. Immediately."

Okay Impeach.
Just remember that it's not the best sign when one walks around sporting different names lol.
Google 'dissociative identity disorder'.

newark hawk said...

@ RomneyMan

That's a pretty funny statement coming from someone who has used numerous aliases, such as "OBAMA2012", "Me" and "RomneyMan", just to name a few.

It's called "MULTIPLE PERSONALITY DISORDER".

For more information about it, talk to your shrink.

Anonymous said...

Newark, are you really the same Newark Hawk, or is someone using your identity? I'm sincerely wondering.

Anyway, I would have voted for Bachmann if I lived there, too. And I like her, so I'm sorry if I led you to believe I have something against her.

But, she has some issues that most Republicans agree on that make her unfit for pres or VP. That's all I'm saying. I actually really liked her in the debates and I thought she represented herself and conservatism very well. But some statements she made during the debates were either lies or just a little crazy.

-Martha

newark hawk said...

@ Martha

Yup, I'm the real 'newark hawk'.

I was, and still am, a HUGE FAN of Mitt Romney, but at the same time, I also recognize his deficiencies as a campaigner, and as a politician.

NOBODY is perfect. It's foolish to think otherwise.

As for Michele Bachmann, we simply have a difference of opinion regarding her. There's no point in belaboring the issue.

RomneyMan said...

" There's no point in belaboring the issue."
Finally Impeach gets the point.
There's a first time for everything and all.

Anonymous said...

Newark, glad the hear it. I'm also a huge fan of Romney, but I think most of the gaffes you listed were not really gaffes.

I think the 47% comment was huge though, and going after Perry on immigration was a mistake.

I also think 'corporations are people' was one his greatest answers EVER! I loved it because it is so true. Some Americans are just too brain dead to realize that corporations are what turn the wheels of this country.

Unfortunately no one wanted to hear his message. I think his problem are very exaggerated.

-Martha

RomneyMan said...

"@ Martha

Yup, I'm the real 'newark hawk'.
"

And @ martha, she is also the *real* ImpeachObama too.
Takes all sorts eh?

Anonymous said...

Bachman would have been a very bad choice for VP. Too many liabilities.

Niki Haley could have been a good choice though.

To me though.... IMO... we MUST get beyond nominating people based upon sex or race. We made this tragic mistake with Palin... to continue it to do so is a HUGE mistake. We must nominate people based upon qualifications and get voters to understand why they are the best candidates for the job.