If the center is dragged several points to the right, it drags the left with it. That’s true even if the change in center is perceptual or propaganda-driven rather than “real” in any sense. If the mood/mode is rightish, being too far leftish is political suicide.
And . . . vice-versa, of course.
Actually, there is a movement to draft Elizabeth Warren to run for president in 2016.
I doubt anything will come of it, though.
I doubt a first term Senator can get elected President anytime soon. I’d say that’s about as likely as a Bush or a governor from Texas.
:golfclap:
Local Tea Party, um, nests, will continue to dominate Republican primaries. They will be largely successful for nominating and electing candidates for the House. They will be largely successful in nominating candidates for the Senate, candidates who will not stand up to scrutiny in a state-wide election.
In other words, pretty much the same as 2012.
Warren’s problem is that she’s old. So is HRC – she’ll be 69 in 2016 – which she might be able to overcome, but Warren is roughly the same age and has not Hillary’s advantages of history and national-campaign experience and all that.
She also doesn’t have Obama’s charisma, which is why he was able to get elected despite no experience. Warren wouldn’t have that advantage, especially given the fact that any Democrat will be held down by the Obama Presidency assuming he stays around 42% approval.
For the indefinite future, adaher, you’ll find that every Democratic presidential nominee will enjoy some significant advantage at the polls just by virtue of being a not-Republican.
:golfclap: I saw what you did there. 
Merciful Og! Is this stupid coward a typical TP candidate?!
Just as I’ve wondered whether Bitcoins were invented to keep the sales of graphics cards high, and whether the NSA spying is fostered by tech manufacturers looking to make an honest buck, I wonder if all the little teapots are sponsored in order to sell news.
After eight years of an unpopular President, you’ll find that any nominee will enjoy an advantage from not being from the same party as that unpopular President. Just ask John McCain, who lost despite being one of the most popular politicians in America before Bush dragged his ass down.
Well, there’s a HUGE difference in following a President who - on E-Day - was at 25% and following a President currently tracking at 47%.
In fact - discounting the two presidents who saw a growth in the popularity for their second term (Reagan and Clinton) - the average second-term popularity is 43.4%. There’s an argument to be made that Obama is doing BETTER than the historical average there.
In fact, adaher, a low approval rating is going to hammer an R candidate more than a D candidate simply because of the built in advantage the D candidate will have.
The built in advantage is in your hopes and dreams.
The winning party always seems to be the one with the advantage until they lose. Remember 2004?
Are you seriously arguing that there’s not an inherent electoral college advantage leaning blue?
Seriously?
Not enough to overcome Americans’ tendency to have the White House change hands regularly. A two point swing in the national popular vote turned a couple of OBama states red: North Carolina and Indiana in 2012, another two points in 2016 would turn Ohio, Florida, Colorado, and Virginia.
The key question is whether Obama’s coalition turns out when he’s not on the ticket. The early answer is no.
Maybe if Republicans get lucky, there will be another terrorist attack.
Just tell me if this is going to be 2016’s “skewed polls” and “oversampling Democrats.”
Well, the current polls show Hillary Clinton smashing all GOP opposition, so for now I’d say Democrats don’t need any “built-in” advantages to win. Her lead goes way beyond demographics or an electoral college advantage.
I’ll admit that Democrats start out with an edge, but it’s not enough to overcome the kinds of political tidal waves that often decide elections. People tend to keep on fighting the last war. 2012 was very much an example of how demographics are putting the GOP at a disadvantage. But it only matters in close races. If Hillary Clinton is indeed as popular as she seems now despite being a key member of an unpopular administration, then she won’t need Barack Obama’s coalition to win. She’ll just clean up among all demographic groups, white males included. If the nominee is someone else and voters want a change, and Obama’s coalition continues to be unmotivated when he’s not on the ticket, then the GOP will win handily.