Hey, who’s up for the 2016 campaign?

posted at 11:36 am on November 21, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

I remember a time in America when we used to have some time between elections to reflect on the lessons of the previous contests, develop some talent in the field, and actually get a few things done before worrying about the next election.  If that sounds like a Grandpa walked seventeen miles to school in the snow barefoot and uphill both ways story, well, this article from Politico probably doesn’t bother you at all:

Tired of presidential politics? Get over it: Upwards of 15 prominent Republicans are privately contemplating 2016 campaigns for the presidency — and the most serious and ambitious of the bunch are already plunging in, some quite publicly.

Don’t expect them to officially announce or even officially decide for many months. But Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) are doing nothing to disguise their presidential ambitions. …

Rubio and Ryan, both arguably better positioned than Jindal, are also competing for the mantle of the high-energy, forward-thinking conservative. POLITICO has learned both will unveil new policy plans at an awards dinner of the Jack Kemp Foundation in early December: Ryan will begin a new push on a more modern approach to alleviating poverty, focused on education; Rubio will lift the curtain on an economic empowerment message, heavy on college affordability and workforce training.

That upcoming duet is one of the clearest signs that this presidential race is beginning as early as any in history.

Not to be outdone, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), son of Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and heir to his father’s libertarian following, is now on the record exploring a run that will focus heavily on returning power to the states. In a post-election interview with POLITICO, Paul said he wants to find common ground with liberal Democrats on softer marijuana laws and help create an eventual pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

Far be it from me to cast any cold water on the economic boost that a political campaign provides, but, er … we’re four years away from that election. We do have another one coming up before then — a midterm Congressional election that might be an opportunity for some success.  Shouldn’t Republicans focus more on producing Senate candidates to challenge the incumbent Democrats who will have to defend twice as many seats as the GOP in 2014?  I mean, it’s great to get a look at policy innovation — something the Republican Party desperately needs, especially in dealing with urban policy — but maybe we could focus on that as something to do now rather than promise in the context of the 2016 elections.

However, if Republican candidates can’t wait to get started, they should also remember that media outlets can’t wait to start marginalizing them, too.  Matt Lewis writes that the Republicans looking to get a head start on their 2016 ambitions had better be on guard against “Palinization,” which GQ tried with Marco Rubio:

Mark Halperin nailed it on “Morning Joe”:

“There’s one area where Democrats are really far ahead of Republicans right now. Science and technology, no. It’s doing this thing that Democrats failed to do in 2000, to stop George W. Bush, which is really, really early on using the left-wing Freak Show to define anyone who’s thinking of running for President, as quickly as possible, in negative terms on Twitter, on cable, on the Internet. They’re all over this Rubio thing because they want to control his image in a negative way and they did it this cycle too. They went after Romney early, it really hurt him. And they’re doing it now.”

And so, this is a strategy. Like Sarah Palin in 2008, Democrats view Marco Rubio as a major threat — not just for one or two elections — but someone who could undermine their advantage among the college educated, the young, and Latinos. Like Palin in ’08, he is viewed as an existential threat.

And just like Palin — whom they feared — they wan’t to destroy his credibility; to make him a joke.

For obvious reasons, it is vital that Rubio — and, in fact, all conservatives going forward — be able to articulate a serious conservative worldview that doesn’t fit the “anti-science” stereotype. (This is part of what I mean when I talk about cosmopolitan conservatism.)

The GQ question reminds me of George Stephanopoulos tossing in the non-sequitur issue of contraception in the New Hampshire debate last January, magically just a couple of weeks before the Obama administration offered the HHS mandate and declared that Republicans wage a “war on women.”  Peter Wehner has some thoughts about the new environment for Republicans in the mainstream media, whose biases have become all but declared, which he approaches from the context of the Benghazi terrorist attack:

In the Benghazi story, we have four dead Americans. A lack of security that borders on criminal negligence. No apparent effort was made to save the lives of Messrs. Woods and Doherty, despite their pleas. The Obama administration, including the president, gave false and misleading accounts of what happened despite mounting evidence to the contrary. And the person who was wrongly accused of inciting the attacks by making a crude YouTube video is now in prison. Yet the press has, for the most part, treated this story with ambivalence and reluctance. A reliable barometer of the views of the elite media is Tom Friedman of the New York Times, who said on Meet the Press on Sunday, “To me, Libya is not a scandal, it’s a tragedy.”

Here’s the thing, though. If the exact same incidents had occurred in the exact same order, and if it had happened during the watch of a conservative president, it would be a treated as a scandal. An epic one, in fact. The coverage, starting on September 12 and starting with Mr. Friedman’s newspaper, would have been nonstop, ferociously negative, and the pressure put on the president and his administration would have been crushing. Jon Stewart, the moral conscience of an increasing number of journalists, wouldn’t have let this story die. …

For some journalists, it’s fairly clear as to why: they had a rooting interest in Mr. Obama winning and they carried a deep dislike, even contempt, for Governor Romney. But for many others I think the explanation is more subtle and in some respects more problematic. They appear to be completely blind to their biases and double standards. If you gave them sodium pentothal, they would say they were being objective. Self-examination, it turns out, is harder than self-justification. And of course being surrounded with people who share and reinforce your presuppositions and worldview doesn’t help matters. …

In general, journalists receive critiques like this with indignation. They enjoy holding up public officials, but not themselves, to intense scrutiny. They insist that their personal biases never bleed into their story selection or coverage. But the outstanding ones and the honest ones would admit, though perhaps only to themselves, that the double standard is real and troubling, that it’s injurious to their profession, and that things really do need to change. Perhaps because they still know why they got into journalism in the first place—not for advocacy but to report the news in a relatively even-handed manner, to “speak truth to power,” regardless of the political views of those in power, and to pursue stories in a way that is fair and unafraid.

Today such an attitude sounds almost quaint.

Republican candidates had better get used to the idea that most of the establishment media wants to see them fail.  The first rule of media relations is this: start preparing for each interview as a hostile encounter not with an objective journalist but with a partisan looking to pursue the “Left-wing freak show,” using Halperin’s words.  That may be unfair to some journalists who pursue their trade honestly, but if so, it’s incumbent on them to pressure and shame their colleagues into better behavior.

And maybe that’s a good reason to get a four-year head start on the process.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Shouldn’t Republicans focus more on producing Senate candidates to challenge the incumbent Democrats who will have to defend twice as many seats as the GOP in 2014?

Why? McConnell doesn’t want the majority leader’s responsibilities.

Steve Eggleston on November 21, 2012 at 11:38 AM

My Picks:
Mitch Daniels
Bobby Jindal
John Kasich
Bob McConnell

Add to that – Martinez from New Mexico.

jake-the-goose on November 21, 2012 at 11:38 AM

With the outcome of the last election, 2016 can’t get here fast enough.

This Thanksgiving I am thankful for the 22nd Amendment!

Who’s with me?

Abby Adams on November 21, 2012 at 11:39 AM

First, let’s not have a depression. 2013 and especially 2014 will be tough years. I don’t even want to guess after 2014.

Oil Can on November 21, 2012 at 11:40 AM

I was up for the 2016 election the second Obama was declared the winner.

The fact that the election is 48 months away is the only thing that will make any of what will happen in Obama’s 2nd term tolerable.

milcus on November 21, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Shouldn’t Republicans focus more on producing Senate candidates to challenge the incumbent Democrats who will have to defend twice as many seats as the GOP in 2014?

Why? McConnell doesn’t want the majority leader’s responsibilities.

Steve Eggleston on November 21, 2012 at 11:38 AM

And anyone we send to DC will just bend over and grease up for the democrats at his behest anyway, lest Chrissy Tingles say mean things about them to both of his viewers.

CurtZHP on November 21, 2012 at 11:41 AM

My 2016 pick is:

Mayan Calender of Death 12/21/12!

portlandon on November 21, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Actually, the first rule of media relations is don’t lie.

DaydreamBeliever on November 21, 2012 at 11:42 AM

I am going to be a broken record about this for the next 4 years.

It doesn’t matter who we nominate, if we let Hillary waltz to the nomination untouched

It didn’t matter who we ran this year, no one could have beaten Obama

Hillary in 2016 will be almost impossible to beat, unless WE define her for the next 4 years like they do to our candidates.

They have nobody else credible if we can torpedo her campaign now.

The leftist media does this to all our candidates early (Cain, Palin, Mitch Daniels, now Rubio)

Time for us to define the race on our terms

Attack Hillary and the faux nostalgia of the Clinton legacy now

Hammer her failures as SoS, hammer Benghazi hard for the next 1-2 years until we get the truth

Remind everyone of the corrupt pervert Bill was. Hopefully Monica’s book will help our cause here

Time to train our fire HARD on Hillary now and sustain it for 4 years, just like they do to all our candidates.

Then we can talk about who we want to run, on our terms…

thurman on November 21, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Run as the person who is gonna take away people’s obamacare. Good luck dealing with .that gift

Mormontheman on November 21, 2012 at 11:42 AM

It didn’t matter who we ran this year, no one could have beaten Obama

Chet Hunterson would have beat Obama.

57 state landslide

corujodp on November 21, 2012 at 11:44 AM

And so, this is a strategy. Like Sarah Palin in 2008, Democrats view Marco Rubio as a major threat — not just for one or two elections — but someone who could undermine their advantage among the college educated, the young, and Latinos. Like Palin in ’08, he is viewed as an existential threat.

And just like Palin — whom they feared — they wan’t to destroy his credibility; to make him a joke.

Rubio better watch his back then. Because the most damaging attacks for Palin came from her own party.

portlandon on November 21, 2012 at 11:45 AM

F

Them

All

No faith in any of them.

blatantblue on November 21, 2012 at 11:45 AM

I was up for the 2016 election the second Obama was declared the winner.

The fact that the election is 48 months away is the only thing that will make any of what will happen in Obama’s 2nd term tolerable.

milcus on November 21, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Yep the countdown has begun.

It will be interesting to see who comes out swinging in the next several months.

gophergirl on November 21, 2012 at 11:45 AM

Run as the person who is gonna take away people’s obamacare. Good luck dealing with .that gift

Mormontheman on November 21, 2012 at 11:42 AM

no gope candidate will ever have that as one of their planks. bank on it.

renalin on November 21, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Far be it from me to cast any cold water on the economic boost that a political campaign provides, but, er … we’re four years away from that election. We do have another one coming up before then — a midterm Congressional election that might be an opportunity for some success. Shouldn’t Republicans focus more on producing Senate candidates to challenge the incumbent Democrats who will have to defend twice as many seats as the GOP in 2014?

This hasn’t been true for some time. Romney was running the minute after John McCain lost, and really, even before McCain lost. Anyone who wants to be the Republican nominee can expect four years of campaigning to win the primary and build an unbeatable money advantage over their opponents since Romney redefined how its done.

Get used to it. There is no break from the political cycle anymore.

Doomberg on November 21, 2012 at 11:48 AM

Has anyone called Rubio a “white Hispanic” yet?

DaydreamBeliever on November 21, 2012 at 11:48 AM

With the outcome of the last election, 2016 can’t get here fast enough.

This Thanksgiving I am thankful for the 22nd Amendment!

Who’s with me?

Abby Adams on November 21, 2012 at 11:39 AM

At this point, I am more thankful for the Second Amendment.

TXUS on November 21, 2012 at 11:49 AM

2 Rules really:
1>There is a hot Mic everywhere. Watch what you say. Everywhere.
2>Every media outlet and every media person(even the jokers) are your enemy. Handle yourself carefully.

antisocial on November 21, 2012 at 11:49 AM

Run as the person who is gonna take away people’s obamacare. Good luck dealing with .that gift

Mormontheman on November 21, 2012 at 11:42 AM

ObamaCare is going to be a mess. The GOP certainly can run on fixing it — that should be a winning argument.

DaydreamBeliever on November 21, 2012 at 11:49 AM

Rubio better watch his back then. Because the most damaging attacks for Palin came from her own party.

portlandon on November 21, 2012 at 11:45 AM

I think Rubio is being groomed for Veep and not president. The nominee for 2016 will be Jeb Bush.

Also, I find it unlikely Rubio will be stabbed in the back even if he does run for president, because he’s much more amenable to the Boehner/McConnell wing of the party, especially on the amnesty issue.

Doomberg on November 21, 2012 at 11:50 AM

My 2016 pick is:

Mayan Calender of Death 12/21/12!

portlandon on November 21, 2012 at 11:42 AM

I’ll see your Mayan Calendar of Death and raise you a Coronal Mass Ejection Targeted at Earth this morning by 10am.

Mr. Arrogant on November 21, 2012 at 11:51 AM

Has anyone called Rubio a “white Hispanic” yet?

DaydreamBeliever on November 21, 2012 at 11:48 AM

He has been called a cuban Hispanic. I am sure shortly he will be called a phony Hispanic. You do have a point. One of these days someone is going to call him a white male Cuban Hispanic.

antisocial on November 21, 2012 at 11:52 AM

This Thanksgiving I am thankful for the 22nd Amendment!

Who’s with me?

Abby Adams on November 21, 2012 at 11:39 AM

With 51% of Americans agreeing that things are bad and probably will be worse, but still voted for the idiot in charge, don’t count that chicken before it hatches.

We would be better off if they got rid of the 17th Amendment, quickly followed by eliminating the 16th.

LoganSix on November 21, 2012 at 11:52 AM

I think it’s a bit presumptuous to assume that there will be a presidential election in 2016.

TXUS on November 21, 2012 at 11:53 AM

These picks

Mitch Daniels (ugh – another central bank supporter)

Bobby Jindal (He’s wrong – Barack-a-Claus had an effect)

John Kasich (He blew gov union collective bargaining reform in Ohio and now has become a reform whimp – but we’ll see what he does with PPACA exchange.)

Bob McConnell (don’t know)

Marco Rubio (a neocon it seems – sick of perpetual war for perpetual peace another central bank Ponzi scheme just like SS, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.)

Rand Paul (Good compromise between a Ryan/Reagan and a Ron Paul whose farewell speech nailed the problems we have with government. Maggie Thatcher was wrong – socialism doesn’t necessarily die when you’ve run out of people’s money if you have a central bank that can create money out of debt to create an ever larger more invasive tyranny.)

Falcon46 on November 21, 2012 at 11:53 AM

This hasn’t been true for some time. Romney was running the minute after John McCain lost, and really, even before McCain lost. Anyone who wants to be the Republican nominee can expect four years of campaigning to win the primary and build an unbeatable money advantage over their opponents since Romney redefined how its done.

Get used to it. There is no break from the political cycle anymore.

Doomberg on November 21, 2012 at 11:48 AM

And what 2012 should have taught Republicans about that strategery is that becoming the front-runner practically in the ashes of the last campaign gives the micro-targeting data geeks four years to hone their messages against you.

Sekhmet on November 21, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Ryan will begin a new push on a more modern approach to alleviating poverty, focused on education; Rubio will lift the curtain on an economic empowerment message, heavy on college affordability and workforce training.

Sooo, more of our money for crappy schools to hire more crappy teachers, or more of our money for crappy college education.

Glad to see our choices this time are sooo much better. Here’s a thought – stop stealing our money, and people can afford to pay for better education.

hawksruleva on November 21, 2012 at 11:54 AM

I think Rubio is being groomed for Veep and not president. The nominee for 2016 will be Jeb Bush.

Also, I find it unlikely Rubio will be stabbed in the back even if he does run for president, because he’s much more amenable to the Boehner/McConnell wing of the party, especially on the amnesty issue.

Doomberg on November 21, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Jeb won’t win the nod, not when there are better alternatives without his family baggage.

changer1701 on November 21, 2012 at 11:55 AM

And what 2012 should have taught Republicans about that strategery is that becoming the front-runner practically in the ashes of the last campaign gives the micro-targeting data geeks four years to hone their messages against you.

Sekhmet on November 21, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Well said. If you’re really serious about 2016, you should be spending the next year collecting information about voters, learning what messages appeal to which audiences, and building a network to handle a massive GOTV effort.

hawksruleva on November 21, 2012 at 11:56 AM

And so, this is a strategy. Like Sarah Palin in 2008, Democrats view Marco Rubio as a major threat — not just for one or two elections — but someone who could undermine their advantage among the college educated, the young, and Latinos. Like Palin in ’08, he is viewed as an existential threat.

So, IOW the media lied/lies r.e. Palin, seems she`s not the dunderhead they portray her as, and is in fact a force to be recon`ed with, same with Rubio. It is really too bad that so many are either blind and/or dumb to the reality on the street… then again I did`nt type out anything most of us don`t already know (whether it is admitted or not).

NY Conservative on November 21, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Republican candidates had better get used to the idea that most of the establishment media wants to see them fail.

Ed Morrisey

.
Republican candidates who don’t ALREADY see the dominant Journalist Culture as operatives of the DNC, are worthless.

There’s been too many years of this.

No excuses.

listens2glenn on November 21, 2012 at 11:56 AM

In other words it’s a media hit list of who to try to destroy in the next 4 years to pave the way for President Biden.

gsherin on November 21, 2012 at 11:56 AM

I guess I’d pick Rand Paul pretty easily over the others, but I am not sure by the time 2016 rolls around that I’ll care.

The people of this country obviously prefer the socialist give-me state. No Republican President is going to have the guts to take that on. Obamacare and Dodd-Frank will be entrenched. Really what is the point of voting in 2016 (I say democrats can pick whichever dem they think is the hottest and be done with it)?

earlgrey133 on November 21, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Someone needs to start pushing a pro-Liberty and dare I say it Libertarian-influenced message.

The battle of ideas is clearly not going to be won by the GOP promising to the Dem-lite which is precisely where the leadership is going.

Unfortunately the GOP appears in many instances to be almost as anti-liberty as the Democrats, it’s just they think their rationale is morally superior.

CorporatePiggy on November 21, 2012 at 11:59 AM

haven’t you been agitating for Amnesty Ed? If that happens we can kiss 2016 goodbye. You have zero credibility.

Slade73 on November 21, 2012 at 11:59 AM

no.

hell no.

ted c on November 21, 2012 at 12:00 PM

“Forward thinking conservative”=moderate. No thank you.

How about we first try a candidate who’s actually a conservative and not a candidate who is going to try to impress me with their forward-thinking amnesty/tax/entitlement plans?

Darin on November 21, 2012 at 12:00 PM

With the outcome of the last election, 2016 can’t get here fast enough.

This Thanksgiving I am thankful for the 22nd Amendment!

Who’s with me?

Abby Adams on November 21, 2012 at 11:39 AM

.
At this point, I am more thankful for the Second Amendment.

TXUS on November 21, 2012 at 11:49 AM

.
Nothing against the 22nd Amendment Abby’, but I’ve got to agree with TXUS. . : )

listens2glenn on November 21, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Scarborough is right about the Left defining the opposition early. The RNC should be developing an ad campaign RIGHT NOW to start explaining republican ideas in a clear, simple, positive fashion.

hawksruleva on November 21, 2012 at 12:02 PM

And what 2012 should have taught Republicans about that strategery is that becoming the front-runner practically in the ashes of the last campaign gives the micro-targeting data geeks four years to hone their messages against you.

Sekhmet on November 21, 2012 at 11:53 AM

They SHOULD, but they probably won’t. The lust for power often blinds people who should otherwise know better, and there is also the fear that if they don’t run right away, someone else will and beat them to the punch.

Jeb won’t win the nod, not when there are better alternatives without his family baggage.

changer1701 on November 21, 2012 at 11:55 AM

I’d have said this about Romney four years ago and as late as September 2011 I still seriously doubted he had a real shot at being the nominee in spite of his money advantage.

And in spite of Jeb’s baggage being a problem in the general, it’s a major booster in the primary – he comes from a well-connected political family which can easily get access to big money, and W’s people still by and large are running the GOP. His advantage in the 2016 primary is potentially huge, especially if the GOP repeats their 2011-2012 behaviors.

Doomberg on November 21, 2012 at 12:03 PM

Scarborough is right about the Left defining the opposition early. The RNC should be developing an ad campaign RIGHT NOW to start explaining republican ideas in a clear, simple, positive fashion.

hawksruleva on November 21, 2012 at 12:02 PM

The GOP is too busy right now figuring out how to force amnesty through, because if they do that 100% of the Hispanics in the US will vote for them. /

Doomberg on November 21, 2012 at 12:04 PM

IMHO Campaigns should be limited to the year of the election. This endless campaigning isn’t good for the country.

Frank Enstine on November 21, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Someone needs to start pushing a pro-Liberty and dare I say it Libertarian-influenced message.

The battle of ideas is clearly not going to be won by the GOP promising to the Dem-lite which is precisely where the leadership is going.

Unfortunately the GOP appears in many instances to be almost as anti-liberty as the Democrats, it’s just they think their rationale is morally superior.

CorporatePiggy on November 21, 2012 at 11:59 AM

I agree that the message should lean more libertarian, a ‘get the gov’t out of your lives’ thing.

Political parties want power, period. Some may see the route to that as blurring the lines between the other party, but hopefully more understand that if our ideas are better, we need to do a better job of convincing people of that.

changer1701 on November 21, 2012 at 12:06 PM

I think it’s a bit presumptuous to assume that there will be a presidential election in 2016.

TXUS on November 21, 2012 at 11:53 AM

.
( s i g h ) . . . Yep.

listens2glenn on November 21, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Run as the person who is gonna take away people’s obamacare. Good luck dealing with .that gift

Mormontheman on November 21, 2012 at 11:42 AM

no gope candidate will ever have that as one of their planks. bank on it.

renalin on November 21, 2012 at 11:46 AM

I disagree. When obamacare tax is shown for what it is, and companies will start laying off in droves, since now one will be able to afford it. People and businesses will be begging for someone that will repeal this travesty and not budge from it. Romney budged a few times.

The thing about this article, is the one person who was not mentioned.

(And don’t get up all in arms when I say this.)

But Gov. Palin has been right on every issue and what its result would be over the last 4 years. And she is already garnering endorsements for 2016.

She went after obama in areas where Romney and the other candidates refused to. She had nothing to lose. I still did not see Romney excite the base, the way Palin could.

Romney was given golden oppurtunity to go after obama on Benghazi and he refused to do it during the debate.

I think alot of people thought that if was not going to challenge obama on that, what other areas would he not challenge obama on.

One last thing, there are whispers from her family, that in 2016, she is seriously thinking about it already.

I think about 2012 was too close to 2008, like 1964 was too close to 1960, but in 1968, Nixon was different and with the issues in the country, won in a landslide against the sitting VP.

I think in 2016, she will be better prepared. I see her departing from Fox in the next year or so to build an organization for her run. And one thing about Romney that is different than Palin, she already has conservative credentials. She already hs evangelicals in her back pocket, and she can raise money by the fistfulls, and draw the crowds.

ConservativePartyNow on November 21, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Obama 2016

Whichever Obama is available, I don’t care which one, just make it an Obama.

Bishop on November 21, 2012 at 12:06 PM

The GOP is too busy right now figuring out how to force amnesty through, because if they do that 100% of the Hispanics in the US will vote for them. /

Doomberg on November 21, 2012 at 12:04 PM

What’s the problem with the other 25%. They don’t like amnesty?

Frank Enstine on November 21, 2012 at 12:06 PM

My List:
Bobby Jindal
Sarah Palin
Marco Rubio
and Morning Joe just to watch him get destroyed

KBird on November 21, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Scarborough is right about the Left defining the opposition early. The RNC should be developing an ad campaign RIGHT NOW to start explaining republican ideas in a clear, simple, positive fashion.

hawksruleva on November 21, 2012 at 12:02 PM

That’s been our problem every election – bad messaging.

I think this is a wonderful idea.

gophergirl on November 21, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Whichever Obama is available, I don’t care which one, just make it an Obama.

Bishop on November 21, 2012 at 12:06 PM

I’d prefer one from Kenya, but whatevs

Slade73 on November 21, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Let. It. Burn.

Let the left wing freak show own it.

JPeterman on November 21, 2012 at 12:09 PM

The nominee for 2016 will be Jeb Bush.

Doomberg on November 21, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Nooooooo!

Dr. Demento on November 21, 2012 at 12:09 PM

I think Rubio is being groomed for Veep and not president. The nominee for 2016 will be Jeb Bush.

Also, I find it unlikely Rubio will be stabbed in the back even if he does run for president, because he’s much more amenable to the Boehner/McConnell wing of the party, especially on the amnesty issue.

Doomberg on November 21, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Jeb and Rubio can’t be on same ticket. rule sez, Prez and VP candidates come from different states

ConservativePartyNow on November 21, 2012 at 12:09 PM

And maybe that’s a good reason to get a four-year head start on the process.

Yep, so we should be speculating on who the top Democrat contenders will be so we can start destroying them. Questions on Benghazi, for example, should be directed more at Hillary rather than Obama.

The oppo research and undermining of Obama should have started immediately after his 2004 convention speech. If Reverend Wright had been publicized earlier, it may have scared off influential Democrats. We see the media getting all excited over a young Democrat, they need to be targeted right away.

This stuff needs to start early. We need to learn form these scumbags, or we’ll lose every time.

forest on November 21, 2012 at 12:11 PM

I like Ryan’s idea of speaking in the inner city. I want to see him on the worst street corners in Cleveland

Mormontheman on November 21, 2012 at 12:13 PM

TXUS on November 21, 2012 at 11:49 AM

listens2glenn on November 21, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Okay, ALL the Amendments ending in “2″: the 2nd, the 12th, the 22nd.

Abby Adams on November 21, 2012 at 12:14 PM

I wonder how much of the black vote Allen West would get

Slade73 on November 21, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Republicans should be looking fowards to the 2014 midterm elections first.

Dollayo on November 21, 2012 at 12:14 PM

I’d have said this about Romney four years ago and as late as September 2011 I still seriously doubted he had a real shot at being the nominee in spite of his money advantage.

And in spite of Jeb’s baggage being a problem in the general, it’s a major booster in the primary – he comes from a well-connected political family which can easily get access to big money, and W’s people still by and large are running the GOP. His advantage in the 2016 primary is potentially huge, especially if the GOP repeats their 2011-2012 behaviors.

Doomberg on November 21, 2012 at 12:03 PM

But our field of candidates this time was incredibly weak. Compare that to the Dem slate in ’08, when they had TWO heavyweights duking it out. In contrast, we had no heavyweights, and each of the candidates had significant drawbacks. It was a war of attrition, and Romney won it. I still think he was the best one out of that mix once Perry crashed and burned, but it was the best of a bad lot.

In ’16, though, we *should* have a much stronger field, and Bush will have a problem sticking out from that crowd. I’m not even sure he runs…I think it more likely that the power brokers and Bush supporters gravitate toward Rubio then push Jeb into the race. I could be wrong, but I just don’t see where Bush fits into the mix at that point.

changer1701 on November 21, 2012 at 12:14 PM

let’s go full pander with a Rubio/West, or West/Rubio ticket. Both good politicians too.

Slade73 on November 21, 2012 at 12:15 PM

My top 5:

1. Sarah Palin

2. Scott Walker

3. Rand Paul

4. Bobby Jindal

5. Susana Martinez

topdawg on November 21, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Let. It. Burn.

Let the left wing freak show own it.

JPeterman on November 21, 2012 at 12:09 PM

But it never works out that way.

Look at entitlements. Who owns that entire mess – they all do.

Then look at deep blue California and Illinois. The Dems really do own those basket cases outright, but they elect Dem supermajorities.

Expecting a leftist to take responsibility for the consequences of their utopianism is like expecting Barky to throw you a Terrier Taco and a 40 as he speeds past on his unicorn.

CorporatePiggy on November 21, 2012 at 12:17 PM

The Republicans should declare war on the leftist media and expose them for what they are.
And not just expose them to the right and left (who already know what the media is about) but rather expose them to the drooling, mouth-breathing, cross eyed sheep that are the undecided voters in this country and in whose hands the fate of the nation resides. (How the hell they even find their way to the polls or fill out a ballot is a major mystery to me.)

The Republicans still think that by befriending those scumbags in the media, they will somehow not be attacked by them.
Talk about the Charlie Brown and Lucy football thing.

justltl on November 21, 2012 at 12:17 PM

IMHO Campaigns should be limited to the year of the election. This endless campaigning isn’t good for the country.

Frank Enstine
on November 21, 2012 at 12:05 PM

.
I totally feel your annoyance, Frank’.
Believe me, I do. (So does the little girl crying in that youtube video)
.
The problem (in the last twenty years) has been all of the FREE campaigning done by the cheer-leaders of the dominant Journalist Culture, for the Democrats. And their campaigns NEVER END.

24/7, 365 days a year, continuously.

listens2glenn on November 21, 2012 at 12:18 PM

TXUS on November 21, 2012 at 11:49 AM

listens2glenn on November 21, 2012 at 12:02 PM

.
Okay, ALL the Amendments ending in “2″: the 2nd, the 12th, the 22nd.

Abby Adams
on November 21, 2012 at 12:14 PM

.
Yeah, that works. : )

listens2glenn on November 21, 2012 at 12:20 PM

Unfortunately, the Republicans over and over have reinforced their reputation as the Stupid Party by playing footsie with the totally partisan media.

graywolf on November 21, 2012 at 12:25 PM

John Kasich 2016! Success in OH, working class background, Strong core values and no nonsense straight talk personality.

katesmom on November 21, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Meh, this is pretty meaningless. Look what was written about the 2008 elections after the elections in 2004 and look what was written about 2012 in 2008. Who would have thought in 2008 that Saintorum would turn out to be Willards most serious challenger?

I dont think Ryan will run for the presidency, despite his veep gig, he is just a congressman and these gus dont have a high success rate running for President. I wish Mike Pence would think about it, but I dont think he will run after one term as Governor. In 2016 Rubio is up for reelection in Florida as well, so I doubt he will go national that year. But the truth is nobody will know before 2015.

Valkyriepundit on November 21, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Oh but until then: Buddy Roemer 4 President!!!

Valkyriepundit on November 21, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Abby Adams on November 21, 2012 at 11:39 AM

I’ll bet ten bucks that Obama has an Executive Order on his desk right now nullifying the 22nd Amendment.

BigAlSouth on November 21, 2012 at 12:33 PM

Scarborough is right about the Left defining the opposition early. The RNC should be developing an ad campaign RIGHT NOW to start explaining republican ideas in a clear, simple, positive fashion.

hawksruleva on November 21, 2012 at 12:02 PM

We have over 30 governors who are putting Republican ideas to work in their states. I like Ryan and I like Rubio, but governors have records of results. I’m glad that Ryan has an education plan, but Bobby Jindal has already enacted real education reforms. I’m glad Rubio has an immigration plan, but Perry in Texas is a model that works for Republicans…and sent Ted Cruz to the Senate.

Part of Romney’s problem was that voters needed to imagine what a Romney presidency would look like. He convinced some but not enough. Do we want to look like California or Texas? He should have picked one of the successful Republican governors and adopted their record. The selection of Ryan didn’t make the election about the economy, it made the election about Washington, Ryan’s budget, medi(s)care…the media’s turf.

monalisa on November 21, 2012 at 12:35 PM

The nominee for 2016 will be Jeb Bush.

Doomberg on November 21, 2012 at 11:50 AM

If so, it’s time to start a major third party. I am tired of Karl Rove and the rest of the Bushies in the GOP establishment picking our candidate.

bw222 on November 21, 2012 at 12:40 PM

They should start ads about how Obamacare is destroying jobs. They should start it now.

Voter from WA State on November 21, 2012 at 12:03 PM

Why run ads? Why doesn’t Ryan actually propose legislation to stop the medical device tax? It’s a tax on innovation and the companies that are affected (high-paying bio-tech jobs) have already announced they will be cutting jobs.

monalisa on November 21, 2012 at 12:41 PM

IMHO Campaigns should be limited to the year of the election. This endless campaigning isn’t good for the country.

Frank Enstine on November 21, 2012 at 12:05 PM

I agree. These four year long campaigns give the MSM too great an opportunity to destroy Republican candidates.

bw222 on November 21, 2012 at 12:44 PM

The first rule of media relations is this: start preparing for each interview as a hostile encounter not with an objective journalist but with a partisan looking to pursue the “Left-wing freak show,” using Halperin’s words.

Bingo, Ed.

Until this is addressed, any GOP candidate or any sitting Senator or Representative who agrees to an interview is going to be ambushed.

PatriotGal2257 on November 21, 2012 at 12:45 PM

It doesn’t matter who we nominate, if we let Hillary waltz to the nomination untouched

It didn’t matter who we ran this year, no one could have beaten Obama

thurman on November 21, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Hillary is untouchable by conservatives. The DEMs took her out once, easily, with the race card. She latched herself onto Obama and got her status back, In both cases it required the consent of the MSM who take their cues from the party

Hillary will be taken down again if DEMs decide to run a magic Mexican.
DEMs may well bring up a magic Mexican,do this if the GOP decides to run a hispanic

IMHO the race could have been won this year. It was an electoral sweep, but a popular tie. The election was loaded with fraud, so it would have required a charismatic candidate. The GOP had a great candidate with advisors who misunderstood what they had to correct in public opinion. They did not gain the trust of the missing voters – financially broken underemployed rural conservatives, and the old Reagan blues. This can be done without the help of the MSM. Reagan beat the MSM blockade by being so outrageously conservative, the MSM carried his water by endlessly criticizing his ideas.

That’s ideas, not promises. Who trusts the promises of a politician?

I think Romney could have pulled it off, but he would have had to stop selling corporate Romney. He probably would have been assassinated by a RINO

The RINOs wanted a corporate, amnesty neutral, Dream acting, religious neutral, non soc con dream boat

Meanwhile, everyone was seeking approval from the Lunz focus groupers. Many of these were unhappy Obama voters. Christie the Hurricane Hog helped swing these votes back to Obama, by validating their votes for him the first time round.

The MSM could work the Lunz group, but the MSM was despised by the missing conservatives, and the other swings, the blue collars threatened by illegals, who don’t like the anti American WH

Can’t change the MSM, but there is an underbelly that does not believe the MSM because the underbelly is living the tragedy. They did not trust Romney’s promises. Romney was so close to making the deal, I wanted to shake him
No promises. He needed to work the ideas, and not assume everyone understood his ideas

entagor on November 21, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Finally we start on 2016. If get the ball rolling now the GOO debates could begin in Dec. with questions from GC, CNN, MSNBC and DKOS and LGF.

SparkPlug on November 21, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Why run ads? Why doesn’t Ryan actually propose legislation to stop the medical device tax? It’s a tax on innovation and the companies that are affected (high-paying bio-tech jobs) have already announced they will be cutting jobs.

monalisa on November 21, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Eric Paulsen from Minnesota has already done this and I believe it passed with bi-partisan support. It’s stalled in the Senate.

gophergirl on November 21, 2012 at 12:49 PM

GOO GOP

SparkPlug on November 21, 2012 at 12:50 PM

GC GQ

SparkPlug on November 21, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Something that is taught in various disciplines that has particular application to the point here is that you – the person being “interviewed” – always control what you say, regardless of the framing of the question. Professional expert witnesses learn it. Crisis managers learn it. Anyone faced with a hostile interrogator – and I would classify much of the over-biased media as interrogators rather than journalists (there are, thankfully, exceptions but they are so few at this stage as to have no significance to the larger fabric of what has become “destruction journalism” to offend the term journalism).

Here’s the problem. This instinct – having an awareness of the larger context, the motivation of the questioner, the implications of the question and what’s “really” going on – while, in real time, often on a life feed, trying to respond to a question – cannot be adequately taught in a seminar, classroom, or training session. It must be learned by doing.

Watch, for prime example, Sarah Palin today. Pick your interview – it’s not only on Fox, but the Today show, CNN, anywhere. In 2008, I would hazard that she was the same person we see today. But, today, a grizzly forewarned is a fearsome thing. Watching her handle Bill O’Reilly alone is worth buying a ticket. She will rip you up with a smile on her face.

So, all these wannabe’s lining up today saying me, me, me, pick me to run for President (four solid years from now), have to be very carefully evaluated (for me, it’s almost a reverse barometer – anybody who wants it now, so publicly, is far less likely to get my support later – get out there and work on 2014, boys – if you’re truly concerned about the nation and not yourself). It’s easy to jog around in the parking lot at the base of the Matterhorn, jumping up and down like the next champions of the world. It’s a whole other thing to scale the mountain.

The nation cannot afford another candidate from the opposition party who can’t counter-punch (or some would suggest, in the most recent case, couldn’t punch at all).

IndieDogg on November 21, 2012 at 12:59 PM

I agree. These four year long campaigns give the MSM too great an opportunity to destroy Republican candidates.

bw222 on November 21, 2012 at 12:44 PM

That and way too much time for foot in mouth syndrome. With the media 100% in for and covering for the dems we don’t need 4 years of endless fact checking and lies from the media.

Frank Enstine on November 21, 2012 at 1:00 PM

1. Mitt Romney
2. John McCain
3. Michael Steele
4. John Huntsman
5. Ronald Reagan Jr.

portlandon on November 21, 2012 at 1:00 PM

… Hillary will be taken down again if DEMs decide to run a magic Mexican.
DEMs may well bring up a magic Mexican,do this if the GOP decides to run a hispanic …
entagor on November 21, 2012 at 12:48 PM

I don’t know about. They already screwed her over the last time she ran, and if they decide to do that to her again then let’s just say things will get very interesting.

What I’m worried about is the “electable” candidate the establishment will choose to lose.

pb88 on November 21, 2012 at 1:00 PM

Eric Paulsen from Minnesota has already done this and I believe it passed with bi-partisan support. It’s stalled in the Senate.

gophergirl on November 21, 2012 at 12:49 PM

That’s good to hear. The GOP senators need to take up the mantle. They should be hammering this. Since Rand Paul is a doctor we could start there.

monalisa on November 21, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Oh but until then: Buddy Roemer 4 President!!!

Valkyriepundit on November 21, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Sure, pull that one now that Oscar Jr. is finally housebroken.

katy the mean old lady on November 21, 2012 at 1:03 PM

His advantage in the 2016 primary is potentially huge, especially if the GOP repeats their 2011-2012 behaviors.

Doomberg on November 21, 2012 at 12:03 PM

His disadvantage in the general is correspondingly huge. Jeb Bush is not electable in 2016. In 2012 a majority of voters still thought the past 4 years of recession were his brother’s fault. They aren’t going to forget this by 2016.

alwaysfiredup on November 21, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Yes.. Romney’s problems were that he let Obama define him personally and he didn’t present a vision for the country. People were like generic Republican..meh. The candidates in 2016 better present compelling visions. As for the ZOMG Hillary will win, the Rs are actually starting from an advantage because voters like to switch parties ever eight years. Clinton had 60% approval and Gore still lost.. dimpled chad lost, but still a loss. Bush shouldn’t have been close in that. Also, Clinton is going to be almost seventy. Ryan will be 46, and Rubio is 45. They have more in common with Chelsea than Hillary.

As for Jeb Bush, if he runs rather than getting behind Rubio, then he is delusional. He isn’t going to win a general election. Why not get behind Rubio and act as a kingmaker?

Illinidiva on November 21, 2012 at 1:05 PM

If Rand Paul runs we’ll never get rid of the Paultards.

myiq2xu on November 21, 2012 at 1:09 PM

portlandon on November 21, 2012 at 1:00 PM

You’re so funny.

alwaysfiredup on November 21, 2012 at 1:09 PM

If Rand Paul runs we’ll never get rid of the Paultards.

myiq2xu on November 21, 2012 at 1:09 PM

I think he’d make a good VP choice for precisely this reason.

alwaysfiredup on November 21, 2012 at 1:10 PM

jake-the-goose on November 21, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Good list except take Martinez off and add Pence.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 21, 2012 at 1:12 PM

We have a big media machine to bring down if we ever want to win again.

The media is our enemy.

tinkerthinker on November 21, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Sorry, I just can’t get excited about any of those 15 possible candidates.

The GOP is going to have to take lessons from the libs…they’re going to have to overpower some television stations, take over some newspapers, learn to spread vicious, unproven allegations against their opponents, attack and ridicule them relentlessly, and spread lies and propaganda in order to win in 2016. They’ll have to offer free this and free that and label everyone in the democratic party as racist, sexist, and a misogynistic. They’ll need to tweet insults and go on the View and gaggle with the hens and whoop it up with Hollywood starlets and promote promiscuity and abortion. That’s the way it’s done, apparently, and that’s what Americans feel is important.

scalleywag on November 21, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Jeb and Rubio can’t be on same ticket. rule sez, Prez and VP candidates come from different states

ConservativePartyNow on November 21, 2012 at 12:09 PM

Very easy to get around. Just buy a house in another state. Bush and Cheney both lived in Texas in 2000.

AngusMc on November 21, 2012 at 1:21 PM

This is fundamentally wrong. Who cares about 2016 right now? Most sane people are just scrambling to figure out how to survive.

What the GOP needs to be concentrating on is 2014. Laser-like. There are a bunch of Democrat Senators out there who need to be demonized, trashed and destroyed. Same for every Democrat member of the House.

Will the GOP ever learn how to street fight? I doubt it. Those RINOs and panty waists either have the tea party do the heavy lifting or else be happy relegated to the wilderness. The only way to beat the Democrats and have any chance of a future is to begin demonizing and trashing the opposition. Anybody who had a DWI all of their constituents should be blasted with emails and videos and direct mail.

God help any of them who took ever took a bribe (Harry Reid) or made any kind of mistake whatsoever needs to be demonized.

Let’s show the democrats what the politics of personal destruction really looks like. The state media won’t participate but they can’t stop the internet, direct mail, personal visits, robocalls and candidates who aren’t afraid of knife fights.

kens on November 21, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Ed and HotAir just got name checked by Rush.

Second look at Rush being a RINO?

CorporatePiggy on November 21, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Comment pages: 1 2