2012 if not nominated in 2008

T

TahoeHorn

1,000+ Posts
Which candidates are viable for 2012 nomination if not nominated in 2008? (and party loses general)

Republicans

McCain - now or never
Romney - not dead but is so much the product of packaging that it will be tough
Giuliani - it's over
Huckabee - viable, maybe even the leader if social conservatives go bananas
F Thompson - it's over
Tancredo, T Thompson, Paul, Hunter - never were, never will

Democrats

Clinton - now or never but she won't quit
Obama - almost a lock
Edwards - has some chance but not looking good
Richardson - unlikely
Biden - unlikely
Dodd, Kucinich, Gravel - never were, never will
 
jeb bush
eek.gif
 
I agree with most of your thoughts, except for Obama. In politics, timing is everything. HIs appeal right now is that he is new, he is fresh. In for years, not so much, I think.
 
I don't think Huckabee is electable. He is way to much in bed with the Religious Right. They will turn out in huge numbers to vote for him, but the left will turn out in huge numbers to vote against him. Moderate Republicans would be turned off by him wanting to impregnate the nation and our traditions with religion at every level. They would likely stay home in large numbers. Independents certainly wouldn't vote for him.
 
theropods,

Do you think Huckabee is a viable candidate for the 2012 nomination? (That is the question the thread asks.)

I agree that if nominated he'll lose. But parties are capable of nominating someone who is unelectable, particularly if they are pissed. I'm an economic/foreign policy Republican in the mold of Schwarzenegger, Giuliani, McCain and Bush-41. I'm not a Huckabee Republican. But I think that wing of the party could insist on nominating one of their own in 2012.
 
huck is not viable not because of his connection to the RR but because of how his view come out of his mouth. You might be against gay marriage and win, but you won't saying it the way he did. That is just one example.
 
The Republican's cupboard is running empty.

Who is an up and comer? Rick Perry?
eek.gif


McCain - No.
Romney - I agree, the packaging is already growing stale.
Giuliani - He isn't going to risk his speaking engagement fees again.
Huckabee - Likable enough guy. Possible, although I think he would get trounced in a general election.
Thompson - No.

Obama - certainly, if Hillary gets beat in the general, he is golden for 2012.
Clinton - No - this was her shot.
Edwards - He likes his money too much - the hedge funds are a calling.
Richardson - terrible candidate
Biden - the plagiarism aura just won't leave him.
Dodd - Possible.
Kucinich - More likely to declare Berkeley and Boulder to be independent nations and himself the Emperor of those independent socialist states.
Gravel - why was he in it in the first place.
 
I don't think he could win the nomination as well. He would turn off too large of a percent of the population. As for his unelectability, I think it is very obvious that he is unelectable in a general election. For that reason, a lot of primary voters would vote against him. He'll get the RR vote, but that isn't any different than what he is getting now and he isn't getting the nomination this time. Huckabee running in 2012 gives him 4 more years to get stale and open his mouth. Neither of those are good things for a potential nomination.
 
theropods, we're saying the same thing. I'm just saying its how he speaks about his views that has him done. GWB and Huckabee have similar views, at least GWB in 2000 and GWB got elected, twice. He was a unpolished and stupid with controversial social views as Huck has been. Huck lost the nomination if it was ever his to win after Iowa and before NH. He quietly just went off the reservation.
 
Saying the cupboard is empty is incredibly shortsighted. There will always be up-and-comers in both parties. Sometimes, in a political climate like we're in right now, for example, they are smart enough not to run.

There are plenty of Republican Governors and members of Congress out there who would be great candidates in 2012, 2016, or beyond. Democrats, by winning so many races in 2006, will also have relative unknowns today who could be viable 4-8 years from now.
 
Barring the rise of a charismatic figure, the Republican bullpen appears to be somewhat thin for the next few election cycles.

I just don't see any rising stars that meet the criteria of today's Republican party except maybe the red-haired young man from Florida, but I wouldn't necessarily refer to him as a charismatic leader. He's more of a behind the scenes guy who takes his marching orders and bust his *** getting everyone in line w/ those orders.
 
charisma don't hold much water in the r party.

i think reagan had it, but he was a pretty principled guy
bush 41 - i think he only won 2 elections in his life
dole - heh
buchanan - r's didn't like his brand of charisma
bush - nucular
mccain - he's a prick
rommney - technocrat
huckabee - i hear he's charismatic, but again the r's ain't buying it

hook'em
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top