I thought about putting this question in GQ, but figured since it’s election related and all…
This is the right place, since it’s not a factual question yet.
My guess is Rubio. He’s pretty popular with the base, and I can see the Republicans thinking that they need a minority to get elected. At the same time, though, he’s still white enough to not turn off the racists.
The problem with Rubio politically is immigration reform. That’s a forgiveable sin, but not in the next election.
The substance problem with Rubio is that he’s a first term Senator with no governing experience. If Rubio wants a path to the Presidency, it either leads through the governors’ mansion in Florida, a job he can very realistically win at some point, or he gets selected as VP by the real nominee.
That’s not to count him out, but I doubt at this point that he’d be able to be a very good President.
My own bet would be on one of the governors. Chris Christie’s bluntness and partisanship can overcome his moderateness. If Romney can be a GOP nominee, Chris Christie sure can. Scott Walker is also exciting the base. Bobby Jindal is no longer exciting anyone, but remains an attractive candidate and I think he’d make a fine President. John Kasich is not on many people’s radar, but he’s doing well in Ohio after an initial rocky start and his conservative bona fides are rock solid.
If I had to bet, I’d put my money on Scott Walker.
I’ve already made my prediction: Santorum.
He’s probably the closest thing to “next”, but geez, I can’t imagine a candidate easier for Democrats to beat, or one with less qualifications to be President.
I was kidding of course!
His selling points will be:
*He’s a real conservative.
*Obama won’t be running so whoever the Democratic nominee is won’t have the incumbency advantage.
*He showed he can get votes throughout the country. And this time he’ll be starting out with the name recognition that he built up during the 2012 campaign.
*He’s already been tested in a Presidential race so the party won’t have to worry his campaign will collapse due to some unexposed scandal or weakness.
*It’s his turn this time.
That didn’t seem to stop Obama. Then again, Obama has rock star level charisma which Rubio doesn’t…
This has to be the hardest pick in my lifetime. We all knew Romney would get it in 2012 the day after the 2008 election. This time, there isn’t anyone who jumps out as the front runner. As much as despise the man, if I had to put a dollar on anyone right now it would be Rand Paul. And no, I’m not drunk. But he isn’t Santorum and he isn’t Rubio. Santorum was just one of the unRomneys coming out of the unRomney Clown Car in 2012, he didn’t distinguish himself in the campaign. Rubio is too ethnic to have a chance. Christie is too moderate, and he nominated a Muslim judge for goodness sake. Cruz might catch fire and he’s my number two pick. He certainly would carry the far right wing of the party and could very well win the right-leaning Iowa caucus. My third choice would be Ryan, but since he didn’t add much to his ticket last time and failed to carry his own state, I don’t see the party faithful flocking to him. If someone gave me ten thousand to one odds, I’d probably put a buck on Michigan Governor Snyder.
It won’t stop you from being President, but it can stop you from governing effectively. The Republican brand is tarnished enough without electing another person who is unready.
I think right about now, Republicans should be willing to settle for just okay, and that’s why i like Jindal. Jindal is unlikely to be a screwup if he’s elected President.
Mr. “no science for me” Jindal? Suuuure.
And this will be a problem with getting the nomination or winning the general election how?
You mentioned screw-ups if he becomes president , try to keep the goal posts in the field. The reality remains that very important scientific research is affected by who is in the white house. From stem-cell research, evolutionary medicine, and global warming, having a blind man leading a good chunk that want to remain blind is not a recipe for success.
The current administration politicizes science as well. In any case, the President is not scientist in chief, but he is in charge of managing the federal government, a task which governors are naturally good at(most of them), and which we haven’t had since Clinton was last in office. There’s a lot of waste and inefficiency that hasn’t been addressed since 2000 and Jindal has done well in that role.
There is nothing more wasteful than inaction on the expected problems of not doing anything regarding the emissions of global warming gases, in the evolution front then I expect him to be like Bush the lesser, stopping research that will set even private companies back years.
So are you just forgetting 2001 - 2009 ever happened or that George W. Bush was the governor of Texas prior to becoming president?
In any case, I can see that Jindal could get the nomination, but, as it is a common theme nowadays, Jindal also can not help saying things that do look like the ramblings of an idiot to moderates that are still the ones that decide the presidential elections.
The overall point stands, people like Jindal can look good around conservative circles, but I have found for many years that rulers that turn to crackpots for information on evolution and climate science do not stop just there, they are bound to also look for crackpots regarding economical matters and where and when to start wars when the situation comes to the plate.
Sooooo, if a Democratic nominee was opposed to GM foods, that means that nominee would be a crackpot, right? Who couldn’t be trusted on other issues.
There’s quite a bit more to the Jindal package than that. The exorcism stuff goes much further toward establishing his crackpot credentials. But his unbearable lightness of being is the biggest problem for him. His biggest asset, face it, is ethnicity, like it is for Rubio and Cruz.
I’m on the record of criticizing anti GM politicians, that would be a point against a nominee, however, you are moving the goalposts again, that he or she could be a crackpot would not be a big problem if the record showed that in general they look more at what the scientists and experts report is the proper course of action.
I do not see much of a problem if a candidate has one woo issue because a candidate IMHO has to show that in many other issues they do understand their limitations and do know when to trust experts, but as the link on Jindal showed, his problem is that there is plenty of evidence to show that just like Bush the lesser Jindal is a typically uncurious hard conservative fellow and so the woo is not of the limited edition kind, he shows the same gullibility that allows a politician to be led by lobbies and anti-science right wing think tanks on many many subjects that go against what scientists or experts report. Sadly, those ***stink ***tanks are the ones guiding the current Republican party.