I find myself wondering whether he hears half of what he says.
Is this theory is true, all the bad guys need to do is create a recession.
But they couldn’t do that would they?
I want Carly Fiorina to win the GOP nominee because there’s no way in hell she’ll ever win. I see her as having less of a chance than any of the guys who already dropped out, though its pretty close
Not me. I know it’s going to be won by the Democratic Party’s nominee (probably HRC) no matter who the Republican is. I just want Trump as that nominee because I see him as having the longest coattails, with which to bring the Republican Party crashing to hell where they belong. My desiderata is a Democrat holding the Speaker’s gavel, and another one as Senate majority leader, all listening to a Democratic president givinng the SOTU address in 2017.
Ideally you’d also want to add either a supermajority of 60 in the Senate, or party leadership with the balls to do away with that stupid and undemocratic requirement.
Well, sure, if I find Aladdin’s lamp, that will go on the list, right after the pony.
This.
They need another Barry Goldwater moment.
I think Ted Cruz would be the best candidate for this purpose. He is about as competent and radical as they come.
Which leads to Nixon winning.
Given the poll numbers for Trump and Cruz, the body of the GOP has gone insane. The adults in Washington maybe not, but no one is listening to them.
Not one senator or governor has endorsed Cruz. I assume none have endorsed Trump.
Jeb! would be the best president from the lot, with the best access to sane advisers. Trump as a 3rd party candidate no matter who gets nominated is optimal, of course. But Trump by himself will probably tip a lot of Senate races to the Democrats.
So my answer depends on how insecure I’m feeling.
I disagree, in part, with this post and the one it quotes. Kasich, Christie or possibly even Fiorina, Huckabee or Santorum would be the best of the lot, in the hope they attract competent advisors. Jeb! has already announced he’s going with the same neocons, con-men, and idealogues who screwed up his brother’s Administration.
Among Rubio, Trump and Cruz, it’s hard to decide who would be the worst President but those taking a sanguine view of Rubio confuse me:
[ul][li] If elected he would be younger than any President except Teddy Roosevelt and JFK. Those who think he’d make a good President (I don’t) should want him to first build up expertise, perhaps serve as V.P.[/li][li] Rubio would be one of the least qualified Presidents ever. He’s been a legislator for 14 years. Period. (Obama had only 12 years, JFK 14 years, but each had levels of charisma and vision that Rubio lacks.[/li][li] Lacking any relevant experience in economics or foreign affairs, Rubio is a blank slate. What Tom, Dick, and Devilry can we look forward to as Rubio’s key advisors?[/li][li] Obama’s resume, however limited, included a few jaunts and a spell as Law Review editor. JFK was a war hero. Rubio is only noted for lying, and propping his drug dealer brother-in-law.[/li][li] Idealogically, Obama and JFK were fairly progressive. Even Jeb! or Kasich would be pragmatic. Rubio is a puppet of the Koch Brothers and the Tea Party, each partisan lurch worse than the last.[/li][/ul]
I don’t think either Trump or Carson is planning to win the White House, but if they did I think they’d cough up at least enough sincerity to permit progress. Cruz is intelligent enough to at least understand the issues and argue with his advisors, however twisted his idealogy might be. Rubio would be a Zero.
TL;DR: I cannot condone the sanguinity with which some Dopers embrace a possible Rubio Presidency.
I’d prefer Rubio, who doesn’t care, to Cruz, who does. But I don’t want either.
Well, only in the lesser-evil sense – i.e., compared to Trump or Cruz. Cruz might be smarter, but he’s also systematically delusional, or else so cynical he panders to the delusional as if he were so himself. And Trump is, well, Trump.
By “several” do you mean “literally every one of them”?
Who is Nixon in this scenario? Dan Quayle?
I’m not a fan of Rubio but I don’t think your criticisms are fair.
[quote=“septimus, post:50, topic:742196”]
I disagree, in part, with this post and the one it quotes. Kasich, Christie or possibly even Fiorina, Huckabee or Santorum would be the best of the lot, in the hope they attract competent advisors. Jeb! has already announced he’s going with the same neocons, con-men, and idealogues who screwed up his brother’s Administration.
Among Rubio, Trump and Cruz, it’s hard to decide who would be the worst President but those taking a sanguine view of Rubio confuse me:
[ul][li] If elected he would be younger than any President except Teddy Roosevelt and JFK. Those who think he’d make a good President (I don’t) should want him to first build up expertise, perhaps serve as V.P.[/li][li] Rubio would be one of the least qualified Presidents ever. He’s been a legislator for 14 years. Period. (Obama had only 12 years, JFK 14 years, but each had levels of charisma and vision that Rubio lacks.[/li][/quote]
So Obama and JFK get a pass on less experience because you like them better?
[quote]
[li] Lacking any relevant experience in economics or foreign affairs, Rubio is a blank slate. What Tom, Dick, and Devilry can we look forward to as Rubio’s key advisors?[/li][/quote]
How much experience in foreign affairs did Obama have? How much do Trump and Cruz have?
[quote]
[li] Obama’s resume, however limited, included a few jaunts and a spell as Law Review editor. JFK was a war hero. Rubio is only noted for lying, and propping his drug dealer brother-in-law.[/li][/quote]
Law review editor? WTF?!?!?!
There are plenty of people on the other side of the political spectrum that thinks that Obama’s only achievement is lying out of both sides of his mouth.
This is the only valid criticism on your list AFAICT.
I picked JFK and Obama to compare with Rubio not because they were obviously more qualified, but because they were the only two I could think of as possibly just as unqualified. And as I said, each had vision and great charisma. Does anyone think Rubio is particularly charismatic or visionary?
Rubio’s lies are blatant indisputable misstatements of clear facts. I’m not sure what Obama lies you’re referring to. The born-in-Hawaii thing?
True, I’m reflecting my own prejudices. But Jeb, Christie and Kasich have all been fairly successful Governors. Non-Governor candidates like LBJ or McCain racked up years of experience as top Senators. Rubio truly would be unusually unqualified; I call him a “Zero.”
I abhor the idea that any of the three most popular GOP candidates – Trump, Cruz, Rubio – could be President. I’m far from certain that Rubio would be the worst of the three, but many regard Rubio as acceptable, somehow more reasonable than Cruz or Trump. I disagree.
I don’t know. You have to ask the right wing nuts that think that Obama is a lying liar that lies. I just think he is a politician that sometimes says things that he doesn’t really believe but thinks will get him elected.
I think Obama is a pretty successful president considering all the racism and partisanship he had to deal with. He killed Osama Bin Laden, he saved our economy from going over the brink, he saved GM and Ford (and probably the American auto industry), he changed our view of gay rights, and a whole host of other shit. His only real failures were being black and failing to pass Obamacare in a form that would actually cut medical spending.
My problem with Rubio is that he seems beholden to the Kochs. He doesn’t strike me as a leader, he strikes me as someone else’s henchman. Hillary would walk all over him.
Trump might be a Manchurian candidate. I grew up in NYC and Trump was by all accounts a fairly liberal dude until he saw Michael Bloomberg become mayor by registering as a Republican. That got him thinking. I fully expect Trump to move violently to the left on many social issues if he gets elected President. The right thinks that anyone that is willing to say such outrageous things MUST be telling the truth. They think just because he is rich, he must be like them. Trump’s BIGGEST talent is his sales talent. Then again he might be just as crazy as he sounds. I the end, I don’t think he can beat Hillary in any of the debates, he will lose the election as soon as he says that Hillary has a fat ass.
Cruz is dangerous. He can beat Hillary in a debate and he is a true believer. All he has to do is convince a lot of people (who don’t know him yet) that he is just a run of the mill conservative dude and not a wingnut.
This seems like a self-serving argument. Charisma and/or vision doesn’t make up for experience. What is experience doing for a candidate that charisma does in its place?
I agree.
Rubio isn’t ready and so would probably simply be subordinate to the Republican Congressional leadership. So you figure Paul Ryan would be the real power in DC if Rubio was elected, with Mitch McConnell a close second assuming the GOP held onto the Senate.
You also have to look at VP choice with a guy like Rubio. Rubio seems more like GWB than Obama in that I think he knows he’s not really ready for everything the Presidency entails. If he picks an uber-experienced VP like a Dick Cheney-type, then that VP will probably be, well, a Dick Cheney type. So the election might be more about the VP than about Rubio.