Wednesday, January 29, 2014

Looking To 2016...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Purveyor of Truth


Following last nights rather mundane and short on specifics SOTU by President Obama I started thinking about the future and if there is anyone in the current ranks of the GOP or the Libertarian Party who could possibly be elected to the presidency in 2016. Frankly given the crop of malcontents and loonies(Christie doesn't fall into that group but he has shot himself in the big toe) that seem to be getting attention in the GOP it appears unlikely.

Tonight while browsing the net the following article popped up and given the headline was along my line of thinking last it was a must read. Got me thinking again and if the GOP can find the intelligence to act along the lines of thought presented in the article there may just be a real race in 2016 rather than a shoo in for the democrats.

NationalJournal - For a party that's accustomed to nominating the next-in-line presidential candidate, 2016 promises to be a very unusual year for the Republican Party. For the first time in decades, the GOP has no clear front-runner or even an establishment favorite at this early stage.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie looked poised to fill that role, but his home-state scandals are endangering any national bid before it even gets underway. Jeb Bush would be an obvious contender, but Republican officials are skeptical he'd jump into the ring—all too cognizant of the baggage his last name brings. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker might be able to transcend the gap between the tea party and the establishment, but he still faces a challenging reelection back home. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida lost some cachet after his high-profile advocacy of immigration reform foundered.

But there's one candidate who isn't generating much buzz and whose résumé compares favorably with any of the top-tier candidates. He's a battleground-state governor who's looking in strong position to win a second term. He defeated one of the more popular Democratic governors in the country, who happened to be a major Clinton ally. He's from the Midwest, likely to be the critical region in the 2016 presidential election. He entered office as a prominent fiscal conservative but compromised on Medicaid expansion. And most important, Republican officials familiar with his thinking say he's seriously considering a presidential campaign.

Enter Ohio Gov. John Kasich, the swing-state executive who's currently polling at microscopic levels nationally but who could have an outsized impact on the 2016 race.

"The presidential nominee is likely to be a governor, and, frankly, Kasich is as well situated as anybody. This is a guy who can connect with a crowd, he can emote, he's got blue-collar roots, and he identifies with average folks. He's certainly no Romney," said former NRCC Chairman Tom Davis, who served with Kasich in Congress. "In my opinion, he's the total package. And I think he's interested."

By all accounts, Kasich shouldn't be considered a sleeper. As governor, he's presided over a Rust Belt renaissance, with the state's unemployment rate dropping from one of the highest in the country in 2009 (10.6 percent) to around the national average (7.2 percent) last month. In 2013, Kasich signed a sizable tax cut thanks to the state's newfound budget surplus. Kasich was among the first Republicans to tout the party's need to reach out to the disadvantaged, and he lived up to his rhetoric by passing prison-sentencing reform with support from African-American legislators.

He ran for president before in 2000, parlaying his role passing four balanced budgets with Bill Clinton as a main selling point of the campaign. In effect, he was Paul Ryan before Ryan was elected to Congress. But he barely made a dent in a year when George W. Bush secured early support from party leaders.

"Mitt Romney's biggest problem was the perception he didn't care—that's a Republican Achilles' heel almost built into the party," said former Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer. "It would be constructive to have a candidate who could diminish that gap because they're cut from a different cloth, they have a proven track record of helping the poor and middle-class, and their policies show it. For people like John Kasich, he feels it as a social calling. That has the potential to be attractive so long as it's matched with conservative ideology."

Read the rest below the fold.

Via: Memeorandum

48 comments:

  1. From this distance, Kasich seems like apragmatic politician. When his
    union busting bill went down in a referendum, (along with his poll numbers), he made a straightforward statement-
    "When I say it is a time to pause, it is right now, on this issue," he said. "The people have spoken clearly. You don't ignore the public. Look, I also have an obligation to lead. I've been leading since the day I took this office, and I'll continue to do that. But part of leading is listening and hearing what people have to say to you." Since then, he has navigated between his TP legislature and the Dems,
    exemplified by his end-run around the his legislature on the Medicaid expansion in Ohio. IMO, while
    he puts off the right side of his base, he may attract independents (and the right side has little choice
    but to back him).

    ReplyDelete
  2. I respect a politcian that speaks to his principles and yet recognizes the voice of the people who elected him/her.

    The GOP has it's share of ideologues, but Kasich does seem to understand that governing effectively requires steering a centrist course. WJC understood this as well and it served him well.

    If the GOP is to have a shot of gaining the Oval Office again this is what IMNHO it must do.

    ReplyDelete
  3. He could be a strong contender if he can get through the primaries. Nationally, he'd run into big big troubles with the Tea Party. They all over the primaries these days. If he got through that, he could be tough to beat. Though it is arguable that against Hillary Clinton, Kasich could just come off as Clinton-Lite, and that's usually a losing position. Interesting stuff.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All good points jmj, positive and constructive.

      I too think Kasich would have a more difficult time getting through the republican primaries than winning a general election.

      2015 to 2016 could very well determine the continued viability of the republican party.

      Good stuff jmj.

      Delete
    2. Well, I'd like to see the GOP be more positive and constructive too. As you said, the next two years coming will go a long to way either making that happen, or further regionalizing and marginalizing of the party. Remember, as it is now, mathematically speaking, the GOP would be a minority now, were it not for the gerrymandering they're still enjoying from their (ever dwindling) electoral successes over the past 20 years. Come 2020, the gerrymandering opportunity is likely to fall back to the Dems, as the demographic trends now seem a fait accompli.

      The Tea Party, of course, is wrecking havoc on the GOP. With Obama leaving office in 2015, much of that movement should melt away, but a President Hillary would inspire a continuance, as she's almost as hated as Obama by these folks. And here's where your prediction about 2015-16 is so very prescient - if Hillary wins, the Tea Party may go on strong and the GOP loss will be exponentially compounded by another 4-8 years of their reactionary politics. If a John Kasich or the like won, the Tea Party would likely vanish, and the GOP can build a fresh image for the future. But if the GOP nominates a Tea Party reactionary, the election would most likely fall to Hillary, and the GOP would be so stuck in the Tea Party mire, they may not be able to climb out for a long, long time. Worse still, a Tea Party nominee wins - that would spell disaster for the party. With few exceptions, Tea Party electoral victories are most always Pyrrhic at best.

      This is going to be a pivotal moment for modern American conservatism.

      JMJ

      Delete
    3. I for one do not want either democraticOR republican single party dominance. Wherever single party rule has existed it has not been good for the people. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

      What most people want is a relatively balanced government with representatives that will work (through the fine art of compromise) to craft the best alternatives that benefit the nation at large while moving it forward and ahead of global competition.

      Democrats IMNHO do not have all the answers, nor do republicans. Problem is republicans have wasted too much capital over foolish bulls*it and in the process lost credibility.

      If ya ever come north to MA let me know. Maybe we can knock back a few while solving all the nation's problems :-)

      Delete
    4. That'd be great, Les. I'm in Central Florida, so if you ever do the Disney thing in the future, we could definitely get together for a pow wow. Though I'd have to stick with coffee. ;)

      I can't imagine a one-party Democratic state lasting very long. Where there is political opportunity there is always someone to take advantage of it. A Democratic one-party state would present a great opportunity for a fresh start for the GOP. Politically, as you know, it's much easier to argue new ideas from the minority, because you can't actually make them happen. That's often where new ideas originate, later to be tried or abandoned when the political opportunity arises. As you well recall, the Reagan Revolution was a generation in the making from a minority in a minority - becoming a full majority. Not all of what they offered happened, but for better or worse, much of it did, and much of that seemed a pipe dream just a generation earlier.

      Either way, it seems to me that change in the GOP is now an inevitability - sooner than later.

      JMJ

      Delete
    5. The Octopus resides on the reef offshore from Vero Beach. You can always look me up (hint: there is a profile that contains an email address but the boat doesn't sail until tomorrow).

      Delete
  4. .

    Looking To 2016 ...?

    The Whig Party "can find the intelligence to act along the lines of thought presented in the article there may just be a real race in 2016 rather than a shoo in for the democrats." As for the RepublicanT Party ... : lets go the the tape of the "Four Horseman of the Apocalypse" 'Official Response' to the President's State of the Union speech ... Gloom, Doom, Failure, and Whine.

    Give it a break. Stop looking to the GOP to be a force of positive change, GOP is owned and operated by (and for) Murdoch Media/Fox Networks. The RepublicanT Party is a hate machine, is NOT interested in governing, and is finished as a national political force. Their brand of hate, attack, negativity, venom, and destruction plays well in regions but does not travel across zones. Governor Kasich is under attack _because_ he chose to govern responsibly. He will not be forgiven by the TeaBagging RW hate machine.

    As for events in 2014, the state of Virginia is a harbinger of political things to come. All five state wide political offices are held by members of the Democratic Party. The state Senate has moved to 50/50 split between state political parties.

    Ema Nymton
    ~@:o?
    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. dmarks: "Pretty good message, Ema. Other than the lack of evidence for anything in it, and the untruths. "

      So tell us, dmarks about the "untruths" in stating that Virginia went for the Democrats in the governorship, lieutenant governorship, the attorney general, and split the state senate in last state election?

      Or is this another one of your magical thinking statements? Please tell Ema she got all of that wrong. Or apologize for implying she's a liar. Untruth = lie.

      Thanks.

      Delete
  5. Ema, Ema, Ema, you personify hate. There is more hate in your little pinky than 10 Murdoch Ind. Read and listen to your own words Ema, they seeth with HATE. You are a hypocrite Ema, give it a break.

    YOUR hate will destroy whatever is left of your humanity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      "You are a hypocrite Ema ..."

      Thank you for the personal attack.

      Would you like to address the issues of the RepublicanT Party being a hate machine, NOT interested in governing, and being finished as a national political force? Or respond to Governor Kasich being under attack _because_ he chose to govern responsibly and his will not be forgiven by the TeaBagging RW hate machine?

      I guess you can always come back with the "both sides do it" pablum. But don't forget. you brought up the subject of the GOP's efforts.

      Ema Nymton
      ~@:o?
      .

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  6. The truth Ema is not an attack, personal or otherwise.

    Do you ever bother to actually read a post? Did it occur to you that the best way to combat what you view as negative (in many ways you are correct) is to point to positive forces working in the negative environment you profess to hate.

    Think about it Ema. Reread your first comment. Then come back if you want.

    ReplyDelete
  7. .

    "Think about it Ema. Reread your first comment. Then come back if you want."

    "... is to point to positive forces working in the negative environment ..."

    Pla ...ese. a positive force working in the negative environment? Did you miss the memo?

    The RepublicanT Party being a hate machine, NOT interested in governing, and being finished as a national political force is NOT a bug! The RepublicanT Party being a hate machine, NOT interested in governing, and being finished as a national political force is a feature! All one has to do is go to the tape of the _FOUR_ "official" GOP responses to the President's State of the Union speech.

    Do you really think RW wackos Senators Rand Paul and Tom Cruz are going to let the RepublicanT Party move away from them? Remember the GOP candidate in 2012 was NOT conservative enough. Looking forward to the Murdoch Media/Fox Network presidential primaries debates to decide who is going to be the nominee.

    Ema Nymton
    ~@:o?
    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not going to pretend to speak for Les here, Ema, but I think he's saying that the Tea Party bunch may well eat themselves out of power and the GOP would be wise to go with a Kasich to expedite that inevitability. I don't think he thinks that (a Kasich-type nomination) is something that necessarily will happen, but rather that it would be good for the GOP - and the country - if it did. And I'm no raging righty, Ema.

      JMJ

      Delete
    2. Well jmj, I'm impressed. You summed up my thoughts quite well.

      The Tea Party was something I was hopeful would be a positive movement when it first hit the scene. Being more Jeffersonian than Hamiltonian I thought maybe it would become a balancing force and move the country in a productive way away from what I view as increasing and inherently counterproductive and potentially dangerous statism.

      Unfortunately the rigid unyielding streak in the Tea Party (especially the socons) is as dangerous to personal liberty as the democrats are.

      Palin, Gohmert, Cruz, Backmann, et all will be responsible for one party political dominance than any other one reason. Why? Because they are disingenuous and simply blow smoke.

      Delete
  8. Sorry Ema,I don't pay attentions to "memos." I've better things to occupy my time and mind.

    Perhaps you might try ignoring the hate memos you've occupied your time reading

    ReplyDelete
  9. Really great points here, for the most part...

    The Tea Party has been a great disappointment. I think I am with RN on this.

    The times when they are doing something of really good purpose (like this example of them going against very corrupt crony capitalists gifts to the wealthiest) don't seem to happen that much at all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How has the Tea Party been "a great disappointment"? They did a great job of shilling for the plutocrats, IMO. Granted, they may not be as active as they once were, but that's to be expected... it took a little while for the population at large to catch on and realize Tea Partiers are nothing but dupes.

      I'd like to see the 99 percent movement ramp up their activity. We have Tea Party candidates for elected office, so why not OWS candidates? They aren't applying as much pressure as they could to move our elected officials to the Left either, IMO. In that regard I'd say that I too am disappointed. But I'm not counting them out yet.

      Delete
    2. OWS? Laughable at best, IMNHO.

      If the only two parties were OWS and the TP I just might have to consider relocating.

      Offshore.

      Delete
    3. From a purely factual standpoint, the Occupy movement represented the interests of about 30% of Americans. The "99%" name they arrogantly chose for themselves is a joke, just like Falwell's minority-interest group calling itself "The Moral Majority".

      Regardless, the Occupy movement has been a disappointment to the hardcore paranoids that make up its base. They've really done nothing to further their goal of getting rid of Jewish people.

      Delete
    4. And here is some of an overseas' source's reporting: [click here] on the "99% movement" in all its glory: having slumped to a "15% movement" by May of 2012.

      RN said: "If the only two parties were OWS and the TP I just might have to consider relocating."

      Yes, they are quite similar, I guess. The too-harshly-ideological wings of the Republicans and Democrats, respectively.

      Delete
    5. dmarks, but, but, but... are you saying OWS and the Nazis have a commonality? Removing the Jewish people from among us?

      Frightening, and racist as well if the idiots in the video actually represent a majority of what is likely to be only a bad memory very soon.

      Delete
    6. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    7. To clarify, I am not suggesting as a matter of fact the OWS movement in totality is anti Jewish. I am stating that the idiots in the video are and IF, a BIG IF the majority agreed then the movement would be anti Jewish.

      It is unfortunate that movements like OWS and the TP both which started for good reason and had many positive aspects get taken over by extremes.

      Delete
    8. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    9. RN: To clarify, I am not suggesting as a matter of fact the OWS movement in totality is anti Jewish.

      What? Everyone knows Lotion Man speaks for the entire 99 percent movement. Lotion Man is at the top as the official spokesman and figurehead. At least to hear Dennis tell it he is. But I think I missed that memo.

      BTW, the "99 percent" is only a reference to the people who consider themselves a part of it not being in the one percent. They aren't saying they speak for 99 percent of the population. But Dennis can believe as he wishes. He says "arrogant" and I know nothing will change his mind.

      Delete
    10. I doubt OWS will become a political force with an organizational structure requiring dicipline and a high ranking spokesperson.

      Delete
    11. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    12. The guy in the video that YOU LINKED TO called himself "Lotion Man". I assumed you knew that since YOU LINKED to the video. I have nothing to do with the name he chose for himself. Also, the 99 percent movement advocates power to the people. In a democracy that means representatives that truly represent. But, given that Dennis does not understand democracy, his confusion is understandable. More likely he feigns confusion because he knows that if our representatives stand down (as he wishes), then the plutocrats can do as they please.

      Delete
    13. Be a revolutionary. Vote against all incumbents in 2014 and 2016, spare no one, loopey dem or loony repub. Clean house, bring down power brokers, shake it up.

      Yeah, like that is ever going to happen. Better to keep the devil you know rather than gamble on the one you don't. Right?

      Can't wait for the Sanders spin, er take, on this comment.

      Delete
    14. Right, that's never going to happen. What RN suggests would require Democrats to vote Republican (if the incumbent is Democratic) and Republicans to vote Democratic (if the incumbent is Republican). Not likely. And also nonsensical. Millions of people voting for representatives they don't agree with just to kick out "all incumbents"?

      Regarding Dennis' claim about not wanting to think about it... We know what "it" is, and I wasn't thinking about it, but clearly Dennis was (his mind went there immediately). Upon reflection, I think it's possible that Dennis was propositioning me. If so, my answer is NO. Hopefully Dennis will FINALLY get the hint and look elsewhere for the "romance" he desires.

      Delete
    15. You do know about and understand primaries , right!

      Delete
    16. Primaries are those elections even fewer people vote in than the generals. They explain how losers like Christine O'Donnell and Sharron Angle got on the ballot during the general.

      Delete
  10. I've heard that former Montana Governor, Brian Schweitzer, a fiscally conservative, socially moderate D, is also considering a run in 2016. I like him and fully expect to endorse the guy (at least for the nomination) if he does decide to run.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Yeah, I might have jumped the gun a bit but I do like the fact that he kept taxes and spending lowish.

      Delete
    3. Private ed folks: be careful where you
      blow your voucher

      Delete
    4. According to the Philadelphia Inquirer (2011), there were 4,000 assaults on teachers during a 5 year period in Philadelphia alone and there are hundreds of police officers needed to patrol the hallways. Yes, of course there are some crappy charter schools, too. But at least they tend to fall by the wayside while the even crappier public ones don't.

      Delete
    5. BB: And in the cases of the bad government-controlled schools, the parents don't have a choice of where to blow their money.

      That link, BB, was kind of worthless. Not up to your standards. It was very one-sided and only reported those scandals that supported its anti-reform side. No reporting on public school scandals. It's sort of like those anti-immigrant sites that talk about nothing but incidents of crimes by Mexicans.

      Delete
    6. dmarks: Of course; it was just a collection of 'private interests' running schools in light of the goals-in one case, education-in the other profit. My PhD scientist daughters did fine in
      public schools, as did I. as did my parents, as did my grandparents. I regret the latter were in very good elderly care homes that were bought by 'private interests'. So, I know
      what 'private interests' can do well: make money. And what they cannot: give a damn about their customers. Sure, I can provide positive links, perhaps from the Koch brothers?

      Delete
    7. Vouchers also allow you to pick another public school if that's your desire, BB. And businesses that don't give a damn about their customers eventually fail. Not so much with the Post Office, TSA, DMV, Amtrack, etc..

      Delete
    8. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  11. Face it. The GOP has gone the way of the Whigs.

    It needs a New Name, a New Face, a more Muscular Image, and a Mighty Cause equivalent to the Abolition of Slavery AND -- most of all -- it needs to CATER to the wants of its supposed constituents.

    There is no hope for this nation until every last RINO is boiled in his own blood, and buried with a silver dagger through his heart in a lead coffin.

    Furthermore, anyone taking that last sentence literally doesn't have the brains he was born with.

    With all due respect to Intelligence and analytical capability we need much more than REASON. We need WIT, STYLE, SEX APPEAL and above all -- RESOLVE.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Cruz, Gohmert, Bachmann, Palin, et all will provide none of those things. What they will provide is democratic party dominance.

    Gerrymandering can only go so far.

    ReplyDelete
  13. RN,
    Accidently got to this post, and I don't know if you still get the comments or care to. However, Mike Pence.

    ReplyDelete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.