Your 2016 Presidential Candidate Speculation Thread

romney love is toldja so gloating about the ukraine and some morons floating 'maybe he should run again!' (some of these morons are connected to romney tbf).

The primaries were a dog-and-pony farce. The GOP Big Money was riding Mitt to the end, and his nomination was never in serious danger even given his performance in debates and underwhelming stagger thru the delegate count.

I'm not going to link to an M Dowd column, but she wrote last Sunday "Brace Yourself for Hillary and Jeb," and to me that's the most inevitable of unlikely scenarios.

Just as Hillary clears the Democratic field if she is healthy and runs, a major Romney donor told The Washington Post that “if Jeb Bush is in the race, he clears the field.” Jeb acknowledged in Long Island on Monday, referring to his mom’s tart comment that “if we can’t find more than two or three families to run for higher office, that’s silly,” that “it’s an issue for sure.” He added, “It’s something that, if I run, I would have to overcome that. And so will Hillary, by the way. Let’s keep the same standards for everybody.”

I will spend as many days outside the country as fucking possible that fall.

the most popular presidential last name in recent history against the least popular presidential last name in recent history. exciting!

in Israel?

Dubya's poll numbers have gone up since he left the WH btw

barely, ime bush is still hated in this country and clinton celebrated

also i have no idea who israel would support since they both seem like very pro-israel candidates to me. tbh it's not super relevant to anything except for the fact that on other thread's i talk about israel? you gotta stay on topic bro.

Clinton is a real candidate for the most effectively illiberal president of my lifetime. he's a fucking monster. What my fellow residents think i couldn't give a fuck.

they both seem like very pro-israel candidates to me

all general election candidates since a long time have been "pro-israel." they wouldn't dare to be anything but. netanyahu's insanity notwithstanding.

yeah who was the last anti-Israel candidate, I can't think of a single one

the most popular presidential last name in recent history against the least popular presidential last name in recent history. exciting!

― Mordy , Friday, March 7, 2014

w has made a comeback! the era of "george w. bush, president of the united states of america"-nostalgia is upon us.

Nixon was a total anti-semite but even he was pro-Israel

xp

yeah who was the last anti-Israel candidate, I can't think of a single one

― How dare you tarnish the reputation of Turturro's yodel (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, March 7, 2014 3:44 PM (47 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

the closest would be eisenhower! carter has become a major critic of israel, but i don't believe that was the case when he was in office. but in any event as long as i've been voting there hasn't been a real strong critic of israel up for the presidency.

and eisenhower was by no means "anti-israel." i dare say we've never had any such thing--no notable anti-israel major-party candidate.

Poppy Bush was in some measures the least kiss-ass

he'll be dead this year

no gambling plz

Klobuchar! Klobuchar! Klobuchar!

http://www.thenation.com/blog/178717/bernie-sanders-i-am-prepared-run-president-united-states

What's Bernie gotten done? Not a whole helluva lot. But I would vote for him in a Dem primary, and even moreso "throw away my vote" on him 32 short months hence.

MS is such a lost cause electorally I'd be happy to give him my vote too.

yeah i'd vote for him easy. i'd prefer someone who's more likely to actually scare team clinton (and i don't think it would take much, not after what happened in 08) but a sanders campaign would make alot more sense than cuomo or whoever. there's this real cw that the grownups are gonna take the party back in 2016 and anything that can disabuse that notion should be encouraged.

bush the elder easily the least pro-israel president (part of what got them to the negotiating table), ike and ford both threatened to remove us support or 'reevaluate' the relationship over dustups though. least pro-israel 'legitimate' candidate is buchanan i'm guessing. thought taft might be in the running but apparently he was a pretty big zionist.

Buchanan never got the nom tho

yeah he won a primary though, i'm just thinking anyone that was remotely in the running, not a larouche type or david duke or whoever. not ron paul.

Lol I forgot he actually won something. High point of his career.

poor George

“Nearly a dozen groups exist solely for the purpose of stopping Hillary Clinton from becoming president. America Rising has proven that they have lots of energy and a solid command of rehashed political rhetoric," Adrienne Elrod, communications director for Correct The Record, told TPM. "If we want to be successful in 2016, we have to put the structure in place now to defend her and make sure her successful record of accomplishments is part of the daily narrative."

Here's an example of the back-and-forth: As the Ukraine crisis escalated in March, America Rising blasted Clinton for her handling of Russia as secretary of state. Correct The Record countered against the right wing's "selective memory" of her tenure. Then America Rising mocked their defensiveness.

"They're trying to be a check on us. They sprouted out as a response to what we're doing," Miller said with what seemed like satisfaction.

Only 31 more months until November 2016.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/america-rising-hillary-clinton

uuuugh

my goal over the next two years is to ignore the 2016 race as much as possible

It seems so damn childish to have these two expensive operations daily taunting one another in their attempt to fill the near-vacuum of worthwhile ideas among DC insiders. But controlling that vapid discourse has real world effects, so injecting a few cross currents into the flow from conservative think tanks at least disrupts the smooth and rapid formation of Koch-dominated conventional wisdom among policy makers.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_xyIMGraypEg/TAXBnJnr8qI/AAAAAAAAAVw/EwlKgvd1qgY/s400/alien-vs-predator-whoever-wins-we-lose-paul-ws-anderson-3700999.jpg

man rand taking alot of oppo research hits early - gop trying to nip this shit in the bud before the crazies get a chance to throw some primaries to him in 2016?

rand was never winning any gop presidential primary. he's a nut. but he's kind of an endearing nut, and i hope, when he announces the suspension of his presidential campaign, he goes all "ayn-rand-ian," and calls for total anarchy. like the nincompoop gang from the big lebowski.

like i said, a nut. but endearing.

http://dc686.4shared.com/img/CmO2r5Hz/s7/14176ffda08/Rand_Paul_Republican_Lib_Weed_.gif

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) on Sunday said he doesn't believe that human activity is behind climate change.

"I don't agree with the notion that some are putting out there, including scientists, that somehow there are actions we can take today that would actually have an impact on what's happening in our climate," he said on ABC's "This Week." "Our climate is always changing. And what they have chosen to do is take a handful of decades of research and say that this is now evidence of a longer-term trend that's directly and almost solely attributable to manmade activity, I do not agree with that."

ABC's Jonathan Karl pressed Rubio on his belief that humans don't have anything to do with global warming.

"But let me get this straight, you do not think that human activity, its production of CO2, has caused warming to our planet?" Karl asked.

"I do not believe that human activity is causing these dramatic changes to our climate the way these scientists are portraying it. That's what I do not -- and I do not believe that the laws that they propose we pass will do anything about it...

dammit, i'm playing dipshit bingo and i was THIS close, but it feels like there's one thing Rubio forgot to say. what was it...

Except it will destroy our economy," Rubio responded.

BINGO

I would like to mount a serious campaign as the candidate of the Destroy Our Economy party.

"a handful of decades"

rubio is a total lightweight. every time he does something in public he fucks it up somehow.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ so so so otm.

Any Herman Cains on the horizon for 2016? Palin will make an excellent Newt Gingrich one day, although '16's too soon. She'll come back from years in the wilderness, with a fanatical 5% of the party still with her, still high on pit bulls and Joe the Plumber. After causing near-riots at a couple of debates, she'll seize the lead for a couple of weeks. And then, etc., etc.

They're all Herman Cains.

Your phrasing made me think of an alternate ending for Spike Lee's Malcolm X: "I'm Herman Cain!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQbH_0QWJb0

Palin will make an excellent Newt Gingrich one day

The very idea of this is cracking me right up.

Greenwald:

Hillary is banal, corrupted, drained of vibrancy and passion. I mean, she’s been around forever, the Clinton circle. She’s a fucking hawk and like a neocon, practically. She’s surrounded by all these sleazy money types who are just corrupting everything everywhere. But she’s going to be the first female president, and women in America are going to be completely invested in her candidacy. Opposition to her is going to be depicted as misogynistic, like opposition to Obama has been depicted as racist. It’s going to be this completely symbolic messaging that’s going to overshadow the fact that she’ll do nothing but continue everything in pursuit of her own power. They’ll probably have a gay person after Hillary who’s just going to do the same thing.

I hope this happens so badly, because I think it’ll be so instructive in that regard. It’ll prove the point. Americans love to mock the idea of monarchy, and yet we have our own de facto monarchy. I think what these leaks did is, they demonstrated that there really is this government that just is the kind of permanent government that doesn’t get affected by election choices and that isn’t in any way accountable to any sort of democratic transparency and just creates its own world off on its own.

He's not wrong, but he's also Glenn Greenwald and should be punched in the face.

^^^

why?

seriously why, i'd forgive him a few sins thanks to all he's done to bring out all the info about the US surveillance state.

fight the real enemy, etc.

ok this --

I hope this happens so badly

is really shitty, he wants bad things to happen just so he can have been right along? he does sound like a snotty teenager there.

women in America are going to be completely invested in her candidacy

i admit that this will probably depress me, i'm already more than sick of all the memes on social media about hillary being a feminist badass from people who probably haven't taken a moment to scrutinize her politics.

it'll be a triumph of identity politics over every other kind of politics

Greenwald has two default positions: self-satisfied smugface and bratty manchild. Neither of them endear even his most salient arguments to me.

The wealth of info he uncovers exonerates the self-satisfaction. He's got a lot to be satisfied about!

which is why we don't need third rate MSNBC Chuck Toddisms from him.

Greenwald has two default positions: self-satisfied smugface and bratty manchild. Neither of them endear even his most salient arguments to me.

― Johnny Fever, Monday, May 12, 2014 6:18 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

these are pretty minor sins compared to everything else he's done. they certainly don't invalidate anything. so you wouldn't want to be alone with him at a garden party; so what?