2016 Presidential Primaries [ SUPER TUESDAY | 3-1-'16]

................................
Last week, Jeb Bush, the all-but-announced GOP presidential candidate, stirred up a fuss when he privately told a group of Manhattan financiers that his top adviser on US-Israeli policy is George W. Bush.

Wolfowitz, who was deputy defense secretary under George W. Bush, was a prominent neocon cheerleader for the invasion of Iraq. He was also the top conspiracy theorist in the Bush-Cheney crowd. As Michael Isikoff and I reported in our our 2006 book, Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War, Wolfowitz, prior to the Iraq War, was a champion of a bizarre theory promoted by an eccentric academic named Laurie Mylroie: Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, not Islamic extremists such as Al Qaeda, was responsible for most of the world’s anti-United States terrorism

http://billmoyers.com/2015/05/14/jeb-bush-adviser-scare/
 
no,
a) scared of Jeb and people that might view him a harmless moderate
b) politically amazed by Jeb's tone with a lead. Y'all know sports and are amazed how some teams do things to piss leads away. When they don't have to. As in he keeps walking guys with a 5 run lead
 
57Brave said:
more from Jeb's Spiral

"I don't think the science is clear of what percentage is man-made and what percentage is natural. It's convoluted," the former Florida governor said at an event in Bedford, New Hampshire.

not Bush:

"Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that human activity has led to climate change. Ninety-seven percent,"
Click to expand...

That's your example of a spiral? Sounds like Bush agrees with the 97% of climate scientists who believe human activity is contributing to global warming.
 
The GOP as a whole have nominated two moderates the last two cycles. Why anyone would think the party will nominate someone farther right than Romney or McCain I have no idea.

This primary season could get uglier than last time. You had Perry, Gingrich and Santorum all hurt Mitt bringing up Liberal Massachusetts Mitt. I can't even imagine how much Bush is going to get rammed during the debates over immigration and climate change.
 
thethe said:
I never said that I liked Hilary. Just the concept of not being extreme on one side is something I like. Too much doesn't get done in Washington because everyone is an idealist as opposed to a realist.
Click to expand...

I think too much gets done in Washington. Or at least too much bull****. They need to make less laws or make better laws.
 
Heywood said:
The GOP as a whole have nominated two moderates the last two cycles. Why anyone would think the party will nominate someone farther right than Romney or McCain I have no idea.

This primary season could get uglier than last time. You had Perry, Gingrich and Santorum all hurt Mitt bringing up Liberal Massachusetts Mitt. I can't even imagine how much Bush is going to get rammed during the debates over immigration and climate change.
Click to expand...

listening to Fox, reading WSJ , RedState,Daily Caller or Breitbart I get the sense they won't make the mistake of nominating another moderate
 
57Brave said:
listening to Fox, reading WSJ , RedState,Daily Caller or Breitbart I get the sense they won't make the mistake of nominating another moderate
Click to expand...

I think it depends on how Hillary is doing. If she tanks, the Rs will go with Bush because he'd be close to a lock.
 
going to interesting how this plays out. As a (D) I am not an HRC fan. But good lord she is miles and miles better than the 27 or 8 the opposition is putting up.

50 , how do you think Warren would do in a general OR even better question what kind of POTUS would she make. I'm not so sure she would make the best President out of the (D)

I think due to institutional knowledge Sanders would fair better. His candidacy is uber quixtotic to my eyes. I am and have been a Bernie Sanders fan. But, he ues too many big words to be elected. And who's endorsements is he getting.

With the endorsements come the savvy speech writers and campaign help.
Would you agree Obama getting the Kennedy machine in 08 pushed him over the top
 
you mean when he played with Nixons balls or when he dated a model?

Kissinger was the Leo Mazone of Sec s of State?e grandstanded, took credit for things that he just happened to be in the room, and was a war criminal to boot. Illegal bombing of Cambodia.

The best Secretaries of State don't have accomplishments - because they solve problems before they become problems. Create peacew in the shadows and let the POTUS take the credit

Much as I hate to say it Reagans Sec of State set up the meets with Gorbachev, Carters set up the Camp David Accords. Clintons set up the Dayton Accords. No one knows their names, do they?

James Baker brought Iraq to the bargaining table. We see how well that worked out
 
My point 57 was your average voter probably doesn't even know the last 5 sec states before Hillary. Most don't even know who John kerry is.
 
Heywood said:
The GOP as a whole have nominated two moderates the last two cycles. Why anyone would think the party will nominate someone farther right than Romney or McCain I have no idea.

This primary season could get uglier than last time. You had Perry, Gingrich and Santorum all hurt Mitt bringing up Liberal Massachusetts Mitt. I can't even imagine how much Bush is going to get rammed during the debates over immigration and climate change.
Click to expand...

The so-called liberal Mitt was probably more in line with my ideology minus a couple things. The divide continues to grow in the party and Jeb does kind of seem like the next guy in line. Rubio is pretty much an establishment guy so I would guess it's between those two.
 
I thought Jeb was a train wreck. Now, suddenly, he's the de facto nominee.

Good stuff.
 
57Brave said:
going to interesting how this plays out. As a (D) I am not an HRC fan. But good lord she is miles and miles better than the 27 or 8 the opposition is putting up.

50 , how do you think Warren would do in a general OR even better question what kind of POTUS would she make. I'm not so sure she would make the best President out of the (D)

I think due to institutional knowledge Sanders would fair better. His candidacy is uber quixtotic to my eyes. I am and have been a Bernie Sanders fan. But, he ues too many big words to be elected. And who's endorsements is he getting.

With the endorsements come the savvy speech writers and campaign help.
Would you agree Obama getting the Kennedy machine in 08 pushed him over the top
Click to expand...



I think she's an advocate more than a legislator. She's a good leader and speaks eloquently for her perspective, but I don't know if she could ever make deals. Of course, no one in Washington D.C. knows how to make deals anymore, so she's not alone. I think the same of Sanders. They are both decent people whose politics I respect (and I like some of their positions), but I think they lack an executive mindset. If I have a real criticism of Obama, it comes from the same root. The Presidency is not "thinker in chief."

If Hillary were to implode (which I think is unlikely), I think Martin O'Malley (boring though he may be) would rise quickly. I'm not enamored with O'Malley and I'm certain a Hillary exit would produce a line of candidates nearly as long as the one forming on the Republican side. Here's an article from The Christian Science Monitor that provides some interesting names.

Link: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Politics-Voices/2015/0402/If-Hillary-doesn-t-run-in-2016-here-are-10-Democrats-who-could
 
Hawk said:
I thought Jeb was a train wreck. Now, suddenly, he's the de facto nominee.

Good stuff.
Click to expand...

They are all going to resemble train wrecks to some extent as the process proceeds. It's the derailment that gets back on the tracks that is going to secure the Republican nomination.

My point is that I believe Republican thinking is going to be at least somewhat in reaction to an expected Hillary Clinton nomination on the Democratic side. If they run establishment v. establishment, I think Hillary wins because of the "first woman" factor. I wonder if you can actually get a sheet of paper between Hillary and Jeb on a number of issues.

Given the how the blocs are distributed nationally, I think the era of the landslide is over, but the Republicans may think outside the box and tip toward a younger, hipper, more libertarian stance to promote that message in hopes of future returns. Part of me thinks the country is moving in that direction and someone like Rand Paul could pave the way for someone of that stripe in the future. Howard Dean is still remembered more for his primal scream than anything else, but his 50-state strategy has really helped Democrats even though they aren't going to win in a lot of those states. I think if the Republicans opt for a more libertarian direction, they could embark on a similar strategy and consolidate the energy that is in the Liberty Clubs and build that into a more cohesive movement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top