PDA

View Full Version : Bush/Palin 2016: the GOP's Only Chance?



red states rule
06-28-2013, 03:49 AM
Interesting article - your thoughts?





Let's talk political reality first. To the question "can the GOP win in 2016?" The answer is "yes, but only if they win Florida." If by 9 pm on election night 2016 the early results indicate Florida has gone to the Democrat, then Republicans of all stripes could simply turn off their televisions, as there would be no path to victory in the Electoral College.


Would Jeb Bush have as good a chance, or better, than any other prospective GOP candidate? Most certainly he might. As a popular Governor of Florida, married to a Hispanic, and who garnered a good proportion of the Hispanic vote, Bush would be in a strong position to carry the state.


Electoral College reality shows that Florida is an essential beginning, with North Carolina/Virginia also having to be in the GOP's column as the evening wears on. Bush, as a former Governor of a Southern state, would not, at least, be at a disadvantage to any other prospective Republican candidates chances in those two states.


Even with those three states in the bag, the GOP would still not be in a winning position without Ohio and one from New Hampshire/Iowa/Colorado/Nevada, at which point they would squeak through by only two electoral votes. It is possible to win without Virginia, but extremely challenging. Again, on the face of it, Jeb Bush would not be at a disadvantage compared to any other prospective Republican candidate in these states, and might have an advantage over some in Iowa appealing to Evangelicals, and in New Hampshire appealing to centrists.


Thus, looking at the 2016 election purely in Electoral College terms, Jeb Bush would appear to be in a position to do no worse than any other prospective candidate and, in crucial states, he might do better.


The Electoral College would be of a secondary consideration should President Obama be as unpopular as G.W. Bush was in 2008, and the economy still in a suboptimal situation as regards the unemployment figures after eight years of a Democrat president. Under those circumstances it would not necessarily matter who the GOP candidate was, as electoral victory would be more or less a given. At that point the GOP establishments call for an "electable" candidate would have no resonance and a genuine conservative, a Palin for example, would have every chance for the nomination and subsequent election as president.

If however the economy has improved, or is seen to be improving, and especially if Hillary Clinton is the Democrat's candidate, then the "electability" and Electoral College arguments would have some substantial force and credibility. But it would be of no avail to have an "electable" centrist if the Palinite, conservative forces didn't vote. Although Evangelicals turned out for Romney in 2012, two million Perotite White voters stayed home. Running another centrist in the Dole/McCain/Romney line is no formula for ensuring a maximized conservative turnout. Neither is running a perceived conservative like Paul Ryan for VP a guarantee, as the Romney/Ryan ticket proved


In the scenario outlined above, i.e. a Clinton candidacy during a relatively non-negative economic and political environment, a centrist presidential candidate with a charismatic conservative VP running mate may be the GOP's only best hope. A Jeb Bush/president - Sarah Palin/vice-president ticket covers all the Electoral College, Evangelical, pro-life, centrist-conservative, experienced governorships, male/female bases.


Both are strongly vetted and most certainly there is nothing in Palin's life that has not be diced and sliced, disproved and shown to be a product of leftist hate. Even in liberal circles there has been grudging acceptance that Jeb Bush ran a successful administration in Florida and that he is "Not George W."


Palin is not the media neophyte she was in 2008, and never again would be the subject of the astonishing MSM/Blogosphere hate and ambush that she was then. A Bush/Palin team would be a candidacy of ideas, from experienced campaigners, which would have to be addressed by the opposition media and Dem's without the distraction of lurid media "scandals."


A Hillary Clinton candidacy would require a woman on the GOP's ticket to negate the "it's time for a woman in the White House" meme. With the balanced ticket, Bush's appeal to Hispanics and, according to Real Clear Politics, the even more important possibility of a dropoff in Black turnout allied to an increase in White voters to the polls, even a Clinton candidacy can be overcome.


The GOP establishment shunning Palin to the point of, once again, not even inviting her to speak to the nominating convention, would be the height of stupidity and a guarantee of a suboptimal conservative turnout. Having Palin on the ticket would, bring in a massive energy, enthusiasm and commitment from her great mass of supporters, as she did for McCain in the most hopeless of circumstances.


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/06/bushpalin_2016_the_gops_only_chance.html#ixzz2XV04 vmCs
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=dlia0Qbjyr4BNDacwqm_6l&u=AmericanThinker) | AmericanThinker on Facebook (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=dlia0Qbjyr4BNDacwqm_6l&u=AmericanThinker)

tailfins
06-28-2013, 05:42 AM
I was more impressed with Condi vs Hillary: The Next Great Presidential Race. I guess one should be flattered when analyst start referring to you as presidential timber. It sure helps Fred Thompson sell reverse mortgages.

http://www.amazon.com/Condi-vs-Hillary-Great-Presidential/dp/B005Q823G0

red states rule
07-01-2013, 03:44 AM
Something has to give. The way the country is going time is running out


http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/bg062813dAPR20130628024516.jpg

revelarts
07-01-2013, 06:05 AM
are people going to vote to restore the constitution or just for another R or D faux dictator?

Marcus Aurelius
07-01-2013, 06:38 AM
Palin is not the media neophyte she was in 2008, and never again would be the subject of the astonishing MSM/Blogosphere hate and ambush that she was then.

Of course she would be. They'd just start in on her all over again, beginning with her leaving her office before the end of her term.

jimnyc
07-01-2013, 08:45 AM
are people going to vote to restore the constitution or just for another R or D faux dictator?

Even if you have someone 3000% in favor of being elected and 'restoring the constitution', unfortunately it wouldn't matter. It's mainly Congress as a whole and the bickering that is the problem. The ENTIRE congress needs to be fired, and get volunteers in there that actually want to help their constituents. Then apply term limits to EVERY politician.

fj1200
07-01-2013, 08:47 AM
... and get volunteers in there that actually want to help their constituents.

Actually I think that was the problem right there. So many that got us here only wanted to "help."

jimnyc
07-01-2013, 08:53 AM
Actually I think that was the problem right there. So many that got us here only wanted to "help."

Yep, and then they turn it into a lucrative career. Take away the money and make their only "pay" be the ability to help their country. Maybe at most, pay for travel and such.

fj1200
07-01-2013, 09:17 AM
Yep, and then they turn it into a lucrative career. Take away the money and make their only "pay" be the ability to help their country. Maybe at most, pay for travel and such.

Well I don't think it's the pay so much as what they earn outside of their time there. More importantly I think we need to reestablish the power that the State's formerly had. Repeal the 17th and require Senators be appointed by their respective legislatures I say.

revelarts
07-01-2013, 09:43 AM
Even if you have someone 3000% in favor of being elected and 'restoring the constitution', unfortunately it wouldn't matter. It's mainly Congress as a whole and the bickering that is the problem. The ENTIRE congress needs to be fired, and get volunteers in there that actually want to help their constituents. Then apply term limits to EVERY politician.

both are the problem Jim.
But a new President can tell the NSA, CIA, FBI, State dept., IRS, DOD and the Justice dept. etc. to stop doing unconstitutional stuff. DAY ONE.
And start firing bad players. And begin FBI justice dept investigations into laws broken.
And repeal BS executive orders.


But your right congress need to be fired to. And term limit would be good too.

Thunderknuckles
07-01-2013, 10:49 AM
I think the author of that article is delusional. There is no way Americans are going to put another Bush into office. I don't care how great a guy Jeb may be, his last name is Bush, a brand which has been tarnished after W's disastrous second term. And Palin?! Please. What is this guy thinking?
I don't think 2016 is looking good for Republicans at all. Liberals would love to elect the first female president in Hillary Clinton and I suspect many moderate conservative women wouldn't mind doing the same. Suggesting a Bush/Palin opposition can mean one of only two things:
1. You're an idiot
2. You're a clandestine liberal saboteur operating behind enemy lines.

aboutime
07-01-2013, 01:38 PM
Interesting article - your thoughts?


red states rule. Sounds obvious to me. The author of this long winded, wishful thinking, monologue for a liberal comedian. Is either enjoying his/her new freedom of smoking pot while writing, or is the person Jack Nicholson portrayed in "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest".
Kinda sounds like a lame attempt at reverse, reverse psychology in Reverse....hoping other idiots like the author can find a fan or two.

Nothing to it. Just crapola.

tailfins
07-01-2013, 03:35 PM
I think the author of that article is delusional. There is no way Americans are going to put another Bush into office. I don't care how great a guy Jeb may be, his last name is Bush, a brand which has been tarnished after W's disastrous second term. And Palin?! Please. What is this guy thinking?
I don't think 2016 is looking good for Republicans at all. Liberals would love to elect the first female president in Hillary Clinton and I suspect many moderate conservative women wouldn't mind doing the same. Suggesting a Bush/Palin opposition can mean one of only two things:
1. You're an idiot
2. You're a clandestine liberal saboteur operating behind enemy lines.

If enough people think the way you do, 2016 will be a bad year. Let the process work its way out. I agree Palin will fold up like a lawn chair under just a little scruitiny. Bush has a shot. It's just name. It's an obstacle, but not a deadly one.

Marcus Aurelius
07-01-2013, 03:53 PM
I think the author of that article is delusional. There is no way Americans are going to put another Bush into office. I don't care how great a guy Jeb may be, his last name is Bush, a brand which has been tarnished after W's disastrous second term. And Palin?! Please. What is this guy thinking?
I don't think 2016 is looking good for Republicans at all. Liberals would love to elect the first female president in Hillary Clinton and I suspect many moderate conservative women wouldn't mind doing the same. Suggesting a Bush/Palin opposition can mean one of only two things:
1. You're an idiot
2. You're a clandestine liberal saboteur operating behind enemy lines.

reluctantly, I have to agree. If there is serious talk of a Bush/Palin ticket, you might just see libtards calling for and end to Presidential term limits so they can run Obama again.