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.
Just a fun thread to discuss possibilities. Many Democrats are saying the Republican party is dead. They've been saying that for quite some time, actually. I guess they don't remember the 80's when the Democratic party was pronounced officially dead.
I remember the 80s when the Democrats held congress.
Quote:
As long as young leaders continue to advance and the bad ideas leave (Palin, Bachman), the party ideals will evolve and life goes on.
The purpose of this thread is to discuss potential 2016 presidential matchups, the winner, and why.
I'll start:
R: P.Ryan/J.Bush
D: H.Clinton/J.Biden
This is the liberal wet-dream matchup. Clinton will draw hordes of core liberals, and the anti-gun types (still smarting from the loss of the renewed AWB and Background checks in early 2013) will vote in droves. Core conservatives DESPISE Clinton, and pro-2A types will fight hard because both Dems are hard-core anti-gun. But Ryan is way too extreme, and another Bush??? For the third election in a row the moderates will swing to the Dems. Easy call on this one - Democrats win without trying.
R: C.Rice/M.Rubio
D: J.Biden/A.Cuomo
Ah, now this one is interesting. The presence of two minorities (a strong, successful, black woman; and a Latino) on the Republican ticket will force many racist/sexist core conservative voters to stay home and continue frantically preparing for oncoming apocalypse/revolution. But it will likely have the same effect on core liberals. B.Obama got 90% of the black vote in 2012 (liberals says this wasn't because of racism, but these same people say the whites who voted for Mittens all obviously want to return to the days of slavery), but many of those people would refuse to ever vote for a Repug. Plus there are just as many (probably more) sexist black males as there are sexist white males who would never vote for a woman. So with the core groups staying home, it'll come down to the moderates, which includes a very large percentage of Latinos. A couple of young(ish) moderate republicans vs. a pair of old-school anti-gun white boys? It'll be a fight, but this matchup is a winner for Republicans.
It's possible the Pubs could win in 2016. That's a long way off in politics. Right now, they keep showing a tendency to go on life support, though.
A few years ago I predicted Hillary versus Jeb. At this point I am not sure about Jeb, but in the GOP it usually ends up being the guy that almost got it last time, so possibly Rick Santorum? Since the GOP is having a real identity crisis it's hard to call, but the next POTUS will be Hillary. Her VP won't be Biden. I see more like an Ed Rendell, Even Bayh or Cuomo form NY.
Status:
"Smartened up and walked away!"
(set 29 days ago)
11,795 posts, read 5,801,446 times
Reputation: 14221
If it ends up to be Hillary and Coumo - we're all in for another poor 4 years. Both represent NY and look at the straights we're in now under their leadership ( or lack of ).
The (repub)message is still the same. Doesnt matter what sex/race delivers it. Voters just arent ready for radical muslim-sharia law, yet. Repubs only have only themselves to blame for ever-growing dem voter turnout.
Krazy 2.0 is never going to catch on.
Please tell us where you get the idea they are on life support and what are you basing this on, other than the possibility Hillary may end up running.
In the last election they lost the presidential race with high unemployment and the economy inconsistently performing. The GOP presented an incoherent, unenthusiastic, and internally divided campaign that made unforced errors.
They lost seats in Senate, some that should have been easy wins.
They lost seats in the House, and maintained control only because of gerrymandering. All combined more people voted for Democratic candidates than Republicans. The House GOP itself is strongly divided, causing a lot of inaction that voters are noticing.
Their response to these results wasn't to reexamine their belief. Instead they are trying to repackage and resell the same discredited ideas. People aren't exactly estatic with the Democrats, but at least they're somewhat sane. With the economy stabilizing, voters in the next election will ask if the current path is good enough, or do they want to go back to the same ideas that led to the collapse in the first place?
Please tell us where you get the idea they are on life support and what are you basing this on, other than the possibility Hillary may end up running.
I don't base it on Hillary or any other Democrat, just purely on the Pubs themselves.
By appealing to an ever-aging and shrinking base, they're doomed to holding a decreasing number of local and statewide offices in areas that still hold a majority of the voters they're trying to appeal to. Of course, they'll still pull in mountains of cash from lobbyists for special interests, but even that will start to dry up as they lose influence. That's the future for the GOP as they're charting it right now.
If they decide at some point in the future to give up the fruitless culture wars and take a more equitable stance on economic policy, they'll start to come back. As of now, they're still moving in the opposite direction.
In the last election they lost the presidential race with high unemployment and the economy inconsistently performing. The GOP presented an incoherent, unenthusiastic, and internally divided campaign that made unforced errors.
They lost seats in Senate, some that should have been easy wins.
They lost seats in the House, and maintained control only because of gerrymandering. All combined more people voted for Democratic candidates than Republicans. The House GOP itself is strongly divided, causing a lot of inaction that voters are noticing.
Their response to these results wasn't to reexamine their belief. Instead they are trying to repackage and resell the same discredited ideas. People aren't exactly estatic with the Democrats, but at least they're somewhat sane. With the economy stabilizing, voters in the next election will ask if the current path is good enough, or do they want to go back to the same ideas that led to the collapse in the first place?
you are aware that: 1-the race was close: 2-they had a crappy candidate and Obama, if nothing else is a great campaigner, 3-it is almost impossible to beat a sitting pres. 4-normally the Pres party also take over both houses, this did not happen: 5-how many governors are R and how many D and how many female gov. are R and how many D. Oh, and let's not forget, how many minorities governors are D and how many are R? Yes, the GOP lost a couple of senate seats they should have won, but 2 idiots had to open their fat traps. No one can deny that nor would they try. In fact in both cases the party backed off from supporting either one. Your reasoning really doesn't hold much water at this time. Who knows, come 2014 I might be one of those who has to eat my words, but right now it is way to early to kiss the party good-bye or have a funeral for them, like some would wish. Will they win in 2016? heck, at this stage no one really knows.
Sorry but I don't like either of these tickets. What about Chris Christie? I think the Bush name has gotten too polarizing for Jeb and Paul Ryan just somehow seemed unlikable.
I could see Hillary running if she really wants to which I'm not sure she does but Biden? This would turn me off, if either Jill or Joe are on the ticket I would not want to vote for them. Maybe if Hillary picked Rudy Guiliani?
Sorry but I don't like either of these tickets. What about Chris Christie? I think the Bush name has gotten too polarizing for Jeb and Paul Ryan just somehow seemed unlikable.
I could see Hillary running if she really wants to which I'm not sure she does but Biden? This would turn me off, if either Jill or Joe are on the ticket I would not want to vote for them. Maybe if Hillary picked Rudy Guiliani?
How about getting Colin Powell off the sidelines?
I don't like either of those tickets either. I don't think Biden would be at all interested in the second spot at his age. If he did anything, it would be try to seal the nomination, which I think is very unlikely. As for Ryan/Bush, not in a million years: again, I don't think Bush would be interested in the 2nd spot, if he wants it period and he certainly wouldn't want to play number 2 to someone much younger than him. Christie is still a possibility I think but Powell, do you realize he is almost 77 years old now? He isn't going to run for anything and his wife doesn't like politics. Hillary and Guiliani? It would be quite something if a die hard Republican would be interested in running with Hillary? I didn't say he is a conservative, but he is a Republican from the word GO.
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.
