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.
It was probably in the run-up to 2004, when Gore was often touted as a candidate. Of course, 2000 was a very close election, and Gore would have been able to coast to the nomination on the left's idea of a stolen election and the possibility of electoral redemption. Before that, one probably has to go all the way back to the late 1970s, when Gerald Ford was sometimes touted as a potential Republican nominee. Remember that Carter's 1976 victory was actually a farly close-run thing.
But 2012 was not a close election. President Obama won reelection handily (and by a margin that numerous conservative commentators described as a 'landslide' - but they only used that term before they election, when they were claiming that their guy was going to defeat Obama by such a margin).
So what's behind the idea of Romney in 2016?
A lot of things, as the articles above indicate. But I think most of them devolve down to the fact that the Republican establishment needs a candidate - and if Jeb Bush passes, they don't have one. And Romney is a somewhat safe choice. He's no Mondale, no Goldwater - which is precisely what the Republican establishment fears Paul or Santorum or Cruz might in fact be. Like Hillary Clinton (though not quite to the same degree), he's thoroughly vetted, so he's not as risky as a first-time candidate. The flip side is that for all their risks, those other candidates also have higher potential upsides. And given the increasingly problematic demographics, Republicans have little leeway to be conservative (pun fully intended) in their Presidential nominees.
One clue is in the 1980 nomination. A major realignment of the parties was going on at the time, and the shape of the GOP was shifting from how it was under the Rockfeller-esque likes of Nixon and Ford to the supply-siding cultural warriors under Reagan and (most of) his nomination successors. So, too, does the GOP now face a choice of the current and past (represented by those like Bush and Romney), the potential future (Paul and, perhaps, Cruz spring immediately to mind) and a few potential disastrous dead-ends (paging Mr. Santorum). The party establishment, not surprisingly, is change-averse.
Will Mitt Romney be the 2016 Republican Presidential nominee? More likely than not, no. But if Bush passes on a run, the odds of Romney running do become very real, if not necessarily probable. And if he runs, he's probably the odds-on favorite to win the nomination.
There are NO good Republican candidates. Not even close. The fact that Romney is mentioned shows that the GOP is in SERIOUS trouble. We don't need a Republican goon running for office who only wants to represent half the country.
There are NO good Republican candidates. Not even close. The fact that Romney is mentioned shows that the GOP is in SERIOUS trouble. We don't need a Republican goon running for office who only wants to represent half the country.
Jeb actually would be the R candidate that I (as a liberal) would be most concerned about - because he is well able to get both indie and latino votes. Whether he has the stomach for it, and whether he will go against his wife's wishes, are the main questions. The problem is, he first has to get nominated, and I think that is a bigger hurdle than getting elected would be.
Besides Jeb, I think you are right. There are no other electable R candidates. Right this minute, it is Hillary's race to lose. And she hasn't even announced yet.
Romney was the one thing that caused me to NOT vote last time. I've voted in every president election since Nixon, but I would never in a million years vote for Romney. It's not because of any one thing that causes my visceral reaction. I'm certainly not opposed to his wealth, nor his religion. It's just the man and his demeanor.
As much as I detest Romney, he's worlds better than 0bama and his minions' ridiculous lies. Even then, I couldn't force myself to vote.
well let me thank you for keeping Obama in the WH
he is after all doing such an amazing job for Golf~~
maybe this next election people like who will help put another progressive in there~~~
I voted for Romney
was I happy about his campaign, no
but if he had won we would NOT be in this shape today!
I do not think he will run again
too bad millions of jerks sat home and gave us this POS we have today!!!
There are NO good Republican candidates. Not even close. The fact that Romney is mentioned shows that the GOP is in SERIOUS trouble. We don't need a Republican goon running for office who only wants to represent half the country.
As Obama has?
(really giving him more credit since his slice has been less than half).
I seriously doubt Romney will run again, even if the GOP wants him to. He never looked comfortable on the campaign trail trying desperately--and unsuccessfully, for the most part--to connect with the "little people." He was the most awkward politician I've ever seen. It was painful to watch him. And then there's that pesky issue of his tax returns that he will never release. I wonder why...?
Nope, don't see it happening. But it's telling that the GOP is even looking at a candidate who lost in an EC landslide just a few years ago. Talk about having no viable options.
You are probably correct. But I would like to see it. he appeals to both sides on the issue. Conservative , but not Democrat , but not. A good candidate appeals both sides.
As we spoke, Romney compared the barrage of 2016-related questions to a scene in the film “Dumb and Dumber.” After Jim Carrey’s character is flatly rejected by Lauren Holly, she tells him that there’s a one-in-a-million chance she would change her mind. “So,” Romney told me, embodying the character, “Jim Carrey says, ‘You’re telling me there’s a chance.’ ”
This was the obvious opening for me to ask if there was a chance. Romney’s response was decidedly meta — “I have nothing to add to the story” — but he then fell into the practiced political parlance of nondenial. “We’ve got a lot of people looking at the race,” he said. “We’ll see what happens.”
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.
Romney hasn't a chance in hell
