Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The first, because he has already done what Republican nominees Romney, McCain, Dole, GHW Bush and Reagan did before him -- run for the Republican nomination and finish a respectable second. Such candidates gain valuable experience that their future opponents lack and build up nascent campaign infrastructures that their future opponents will have to create from scratch. This gives them significant built-in advantages when they run a second (or, in the case of Reagan and Dole, a third) time.
The second, because he is similar to the one Republican nominee in the past 35 years who does not fit the "finished second last time" profile -- namely, his brother. Because of the vast array of political contacts of his father and his brother, Bush would be able to hit the ground running with a political network similar to one who had run before. Again, this would convey a significant advantage.
Now, this does not mean the Republican nominee will definitely be one of these two candidates. But political developments don't just happen, they happen for reasons that are reflected clearly in historical trends. And the historical trends clearly suggest that each of these two candidates are likely to be strong and credible candidates should either/both choose to run.
It will be too soon for him I think, though he seems to have what it takes to be a good candidate.
git45,could you give us a few names of Democrats that you think would be better than the Republicans that have been named? Would you like to explain, if the party has been so damaged why they cleaned house in 2010 and why the party has 30 Governors? No, the party has not alienated as many as you might think....
2 bad candidates... Santorum is one question away from exploding and Jeb is cursed with a last name America will never vote for again.
Perhaps. I didn't say either was a good general election candidate -- though I tend to approach the "could never win a general election!" claim with caution. In the right circumstances, any candidate who makes it through a primary can then win, depending on the circumstances and the other party's nominee. History is filled with people who "couldn't possibly win the Presidency!" -- and ended up living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
But back to the original question (that of the GOP primary, not general, contest) -- either would fit the pattern of Republican nominees that has been established over the past several decades.
Well heck, if we keep having these 'best looking contractions' for the rest of Obama's second term, then it won't matter - GDP can drop ~1.5% in 4 years and it will be a boon for the economy in the Democrats' eyes!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
