What are the Koch brothers? Chopped liver? And they love Walker.
If I ever meet a supernatural being that grants wishes . . .
Anyone who can identify with the Tea Party and win three elections in a blue state is automatically a contender.
And I say that as someone who isn’t even really a fan of Walker. He’s good enough that I’ll support him if he gets the nomination, but I’d really prefer someone less divisive and with fewer ethical clouds surrounding him.
He’s not doing so well in Iowa polls. Of course, it is all kinds of early.
They love him as governor. If they thought he could beat Hillary, they’d be backing him right now for president. I’m guessing they don’t think so.
Bush just hired Romney’s old Iowa lead. Expect his numbers to rise.
I don’t know. His name recognition should be putting him way ahead in early polling. The fact that guys like Ben Carson are competing with him says that like Romney in 2012, he’ll win as a last resort candidate. Problem is, this time the field doesn’t contain bad candidates. Walker, Kasich, Huckabee, Jindal, all plausible candidates. Not like Cain, Bachmann, Santorum, and Gingrich.
William Hill have Jeb Bush at 7/4 and Scott Walker at 9/2.
ETA Ben Carson is an 18/1 outsider.
LOL for Jindal and Huckabee. Half-LOL for Walker (he’s half-plausible, in my view). No LOL for Kasich – he is indeed plausible.
They are governors, and successful at that. Any successful governor is a serious candidate. Huckabee’s time might have passed because his social conservative beliefs aren’t going to sell anymore. Jindal has a similar problem, except he’s even less able to articulate his views in a way that doesn’t piss people off. But their ability to govern isn’t in doubt, they’ve actually done it. Both also accomplished something Bill Clinton failed to do: they won reelection, demonstrating at least some voter satisfaction with their performances.
Your opinion of their overall plausibility is valid, to be sure. But if we’re looking at objective qualifications, both have proven they can appeal to voters statewide. The Republican candidates I mentioned had not proven they could do even that. Cain failed to win statewide election, Gingrich never tried, and Santorum did win but then got booted overwhelmingly because he’s the most tone deaf social conservative in history. Jindal and Huckabee easily exceed that admittedly low standard, thus making the GOP field much stronger than the one Romney faced in 2012.
Whether or not they are “successful” is a matter of opinion, not fact. But even if they are “successful” governors, that doesn’t mean that they’re a serious candidate – if Palin had finished her term, she still wouldn’t be a “serious” candidate. Further, “serious” does not mean “plausible”. Whether or not Jindal and Huckabee are “serious” candidates, they’re not plausible. Especially not Jindal.
Romney was a terrible candidate, but he still had a much better chance to appeal to non-Republicans than Huckabee or Jindal. Jindal has been doing nothing but turning the stupid up to 11 since getting ripped by his own for arguing that Republicans shouldn’t be the “stupid party”. And Huckabee is killing his own chances every time he talks about gay marriage.
I really, really hope one of these guys gets the nomination – but I seriously doubt they will.
Huckabee is dangerous in a general election because he’s so unthreatening and a good talker. He’s authentic. Against the plastic Hillary Clinton he’ll match up very well. How often does the winner of the “guy I’d like to have a beer with” part of the contest lose? Um, never.
If Jindal is to be taken seriously, how are we supposed to take his carping about the non-existent Muslim “no-go zones” as anything but trying to capitalize on Islamophobia?
Those statements are certainly damaging, but there’s little that can’t be overcome this early. He needs to walk those statements back and “distract” us with his legitimate policy proposals.
Right, Bill Clinton never won re-election. Except in 1984, 1986 and 1990.
He lost his first attempt though. Jindal and Huckabee got it right the first time.
I seriously doubt many people beyond the hard-core Christian right want to have a beer with a guy with such vitriol against gay people and, for some reason, people like Beyonce and the Obama family.
Oh, well, that’s different…
You think voters will notice that, but overlook the fact that Scott Walker is a college dropout with nothing more a high school diploma? Your impression of the intelligence of voters is crafted of purest anal extract.
These are some awfully thin straws you’re grasping at.
It wasn’t meant to be some major selling point. But if you take Clinton seriously based on objective standards rather than subjective, Huckabee had a better record of political success in the very same state. I get where you’re coming from, and I think you’re right that his stance on social issues is going to be a big problem for him in 2016. But I also think that if he made it through the primaries somehow he’d be the perfect contrast to Hillary Clinton. She’s just too artificial. He comes off as extremely natural and easy to relate to. Plus he’s disciplined. What you saw with his Beyonce moment is unlikely to be repeated.