Ben Carson for President thread

We have a Ben Carson thread but it’s not really the Ben Carson for President thread. I figured that with him now tied with Trump in Iowa and starting to look very strong that he probably now deserves a thread talking about his chances, and whatever weird things he’s saying or smart things he’s saying.

It does seem to me that he’s a much, much better candidates than he was last spring, although still not ready for prime time. But given how long a campaign is, he just might be smart enough to get over that learning curve by November. I believe he can win now based on five factors:

  1. Republican voters, really all voters, desperately want an outsider.

  2. Trump has more name recognition and support, but I still don’t think he’s all that serious and too many Republicans disapprove of him for him to get a majority of delegates.

  3. Carson is now the most highly thought of candidate among Republicans, with an 81% approval rating.

  4. His approval rating among the general electorate is the most positive, although there are still a lot of people who don’t know him yet. But he’s at +9, better than any other candidate in either party.

  1. Biography. No candidate has a more compelling story.

The downsides of course are obvious. His tax plan is even more nonsensical than Herman Cain’s. He still likes to think aloud about things he doesn’t yet know much about(drone strikes on drug smugglers, homosexuality in prison). And he has yet to stand before a liberal or mainstream media outlet. He’s limited himself to Fox. However, he has been willing to talk to the people, so that’s good. But until he can survive Katie Couric he’ll never make it. He’s got a long way to go, but he has the potential to get there.

Has anyone ever been elected President without previously having served in government at all?

Eisenhauer. Or do you count the military as “government”. I don’t think it’s the same thing, but YMMV.

I think the military counts, or at least it’s an exception that proves the rule.

So yes Carson’s coming from a place that no one has ever come from before. But if the public wants an outsider then I imagine an outsider they shall have.

Unsuprisingly, you’re wrong about this, and in a way that confirms your pre-existing biases. The desparate need for an outsider is pretty much limited to Republicans:

No, he really doesn’t. There’s a reason that our major party nominees uniformly come from three sources: VPs, Senators, and Governors. Campaigning is difficult, and it really pays to have considerable experience. You can make a big splash without it, but to compete on the biggest stages, an inexperienced candidate is going to make a fool of himself eventually (Carson, of course, has already done this multiple times.) When Carson does something as big as winning World War II, he might get to be a potential exception, too. Until then, he’s going to be just another Bachmann/Cain/Gingrich/[Ron] Paul/Trump flash-in-the-pan candidate.

Sigh. Sometimes data can be misleading and here’s a good example. Bernie Sanders technically meets those qualifications, but he’s also not establishment and exists outside the normal political scene.

You could be right. The establishment has always fended off such challenges before. But things might have changed now. We just got through witnessing a once in a generation campaign for change by someone who many of us thought would be different. He wasn’t. Any faith voters had remaining in typical politicians has been exhausted. In order for outsider candidates to be destroyed, as they inevitably are, people actually have to believe the arguments of those attempting to destroy them. I’m not sure anyone is listening to Hillary Clinton, Jeb Bush, or any of the other establishment politicians anymore. It seems they may have already been tuned out.

Or, the usual pattern could prevail at some point. I’ve just never seen it like this before. The voters are unusually pissed.

Report from inside the Democrat-sphere: Democratic voters are only flirting with Sanders because they want Hillary to have some opposition. A coronation would look bad. They do not want an outsider. They want another Obama.

Flirting. Is losing the first two primaries part of the plan? Democrats flirted with Bill Bradley and Howard Dean. If Democrats choose Sanders in the first two states, that’s a little more than flirting.

But maybe Democrats don’t want an outsider. If that’s true, then they are going to get sent to the woodshed by voters. Because independents are also not interested in career politicians right now.

Means nothing more than Santorum winning Iowa for your side in 2012. Guess that was a flirt as well. Carson will not be your nominee, unfortunately neither will Trump. As a Democrat, I’d love to see you guys go all-in crazy and nominate Trump, but lets be honest, you guys are going to wind up with Bush. You know it, I know it, we are just all pretending that it is not inevitable. Talk all you want about outsiders being attractive, it will not happen.

It would be cruel to toss an outsider into the maw of the machine that is Washington.

It probably won’t be Carson, it definitely won’t be Trump, but it won’t be Bush either. No one with his name recognition polling at 7% is going to win.

Then who you got? Honestly, right now, gotta pick a winner for the R side of the ballot, who is it?

I’ll say it from the D side. Unless some scandal bigger than the e-mail thing comes out, it’s Hilary on the other side of the ballot.

So, name your horse.

Only you would try to advance the argument someone who has held elective office of one kind or another for over 34 years is an outsider. Yes, his positions have been largely out of the mainstream but there is no credible argument that can be made that Bernie is anything other than a career politician.

I am starting to get the impression a good sized chunk of Democrats just want someone other than Hillary. O’Malley and Sanders both got substantial applause when they spoke at the DNC meeting this weekend and slammed Hillary. Today’s Iowa polls can’t be good news either. There are a lot of us who will vote for the D nominee who are sick of the Clintons.

Rubio and Kasich seem the most likely to me at this point. The prediction markets seem to think that Rubio and Kasich are #2 and #3, with Bush at #1.

He is, but his strength is based on him being different. He’s a politician who hasn’t compromised his principles, rather than a smooth talking bullshitter.

“Preach it, Brother!”

– Jimmy Carter

It’s actually a little easier now than in Carter’s time. When Jimmy Carter became President, he faced a Democratic Congress that thought they would never be out of the majority. Presidents came and went, but the Committee Chairs were damn near eternal and knew it. Plus Carter came in after Watergate, when Congress had little patience for Presidents and was throwing its weight around. It didn’t matter much at all to those guys whether the President was a Democrat or a Republican. Democrats had just as much success working with or around Nixon as they did with or around Carter and probably figured that if Carter lost they’d do the same thing with his successor. Clinton got the same treatment in his first two years. Clinton surrendered on a lot of his agenda simply because the Democrats just wouldn’t go along with it.

But post-1994, Congressional majorities now realize that their fate is tied to the success of their President, so Presidents who enter with less experience than Carter find it easier to get legislation passed. A truly independent figure like Carson or Sanders or Trump might not find their own party as friendly, but a governor probably will not have any problem despite being an outsider.

Carly Fiorina is 3rd in Iowa. She’s still a contender.

How much would you like to bet that he doesn’t get the GOP nomination?

I found this post pretty fascinating. Can anyone corroborate? (no offense, Addy)