I’m thinking Kasich-Rubio would be the best bet against Clinton-X in Nov 2016. It solidifies an Ohio-Florida axis just about as best you can, pairs the most moderate of the Republicans with someone who is thought of as a “true conservative”, and adds maybe just enough Hispanic to the mix to pull in a few of those critical ethnic voters. Rubio, being young and looking even younger, seems like a much better pick for VP than P. And Kasich, with his years in the House plus 2 terms as governor is more suited for the top billing.
Older, experienced, moderate guy paired with up-and-coming “appeal to the base” guy (who happens to be Hispanic). ** Imagine if Rubio got out of the race now, and teamed up with Kasich from the get-go. Could that be an even better strategy?**
For the purposes of this thread, let’s not deal with whether or not Kasich (or whoever your candidate is) can get the nomination. Katich certainly has an uphill battle to win the nomination, but so does almost anyone at this point. This is all about who can best beat Clinton-X next year. And if you want to be even more creative, you can assume Clinton is not the Democratic candidate.
Yes, I think Kasich-Rubio would be a very good vote-getting ticket for the Republicans. I don’t know if the stats bear out the idea of people voting for a VP candidate from their state. Do voters care?
If Kasich picked someone like Susana Martinez, it might be even better, depending on the answer to that question.
Professional politicians seem to think they care. Presidential candidates take ticket balancing considerations into play in their selection. Instead of what they should be considering: will this person make a competent president if I kick the bucket?
Yeah I think Kasich-Rubio would be an excellent ticket and in fact I think it would beat any likely Democratic ticket.
I don’t know if Kasich could win the primaries though. He is not quite in the Huntsman zone but he is close to being unacceptable to the right-wing base. However there is a fair amount of buzz around him and Jeb appears to be weakening so he could become the establishment candidate.
I think at this point, Kasich is running to be the “next in line”. He looks good on paper, to be sure, but that only applies to those who have seen the paper. I think his name recognition is too far behind for him to catch up this cycle.
Is this a woosh? Teaming up two religious fanatics like these would guarantee an Independent Party win for Trump/Bachmann. Slightly above the Clinton/Biden ticket. If Kaisch/Rubio are the real ticket the GOP come up with, that would be like openly admitting they really don’t know about anything at all about America.
Those are interesting opinions. But the thread isn’t so much about that particular pair, so you’re free to nominate a better pair. And by better, I mean “most likely to win in the general”, not “the ones I want to run”.
Bush has the fund-raising advantage. Carson has the enthusiasm advantage. Another poll just came out, and Carson’s favorability rating is sky-high. 46% of likely Iowa voters say “Very Favorable” and 33% say “Mostly Favorable.”
I think Bush-Rubio sounds better, only because they seem to have some things in common (abortion, immigration, climate change). “Bush” seems to be a very soooooothing word to the GOP base, and Rubio could bring some extra votes for that party.
I honestly think Pataki would have the best chance of beating Clinton (who I assume will be the Democratic nominee). Unlike the other candidates who run the spectrum from conservative to extremely conservative, Pataki is a moderate. He can appeal to the same voters who will otherwise vote for Clinton. And lacking Clinton’s negative baggage, I think he would do better than her in a head-to-head contest for moderate votes. As a New Yorker, he could also put Clinton’s home state into play. I also think disappointed conservatives will fall in behind Pataki (especially if Clinton is the other choice) just as disappointed Sanders supporters will fall in behind Clinton.
If New York is ever in play, then the Republicans have already won in a landslide. Yes, even with a New Yorker on the Republican ticket. It’s like talk about how Democrats might flip Texas: Yes, there are plausible worlds where that happens, but in those worlds, they’ve flipped so many other states as well that Texas doesn’t even matter.
Good point! I had forgotten about that part of the constitution. P and VP cannot be residents of the same state.
Most of the states are locked up, regardless of who the candidate is. If Pataki is as likely to win Ohio as Kasich is, he’d probably be good, too. I don’t know much about him.