Q-poll shows GOP 2016 field wide open

posted at 2:01 pm on April 3, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

We’re two years away from the start of the 2016 primary season … or at least we hope we are.  That makes polling for the presidential nomination in either party somewhat of a parlor game, as changes in fortunes for current policies and positions are almost sure to significantly impact the potential attractiveness of candidates in what should be — Joe Biden notwithstanding — another 2008-like wide open presidential fight in both parties.  Quinnipiac’s initial test of the 2016 waters on the GOP side shows no front-runners, but also a subtle change in recent Republican patterns:

There is no front-runner now for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, leaving a five- way horse race with no candidate above 19 percent among Republican voters, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today.

New Jersey Gov. Christopher Christie, who ran better than other Republicans against top Democrats in a March 7 survey of all American voters by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN- uh-pe-ack) University, gets only 14 percent of Republican voters today.

Florida U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio gets 19 percent of Republican voters, with 17 percent for U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, 15 percent for U.S. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky and 10 percent for former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. Other contenders are at 3 percent or less.

Notice anything interesting in that group of five early leaders? None of them ran for the Republican presidential nomination for the 2012 cycle. Ryan ended up as Mitt Romney’s running mate, but never tossed his hat into the ring for the top job, nor was considered a serious contender. That’s a remarkable change in a pattern that goes back at least to 1980, when Republican runners-up in the previous open cycle ended up as the frontrunners in the next. Ronald Reagan got the nomination in 1980 after barely losing to Gerald Ford in the 1976 race; his running mate, George H. W. Bush, won the nomination in 1988. Bob Dole had nearly derailed Bush in 1988′s primary with wins in Iowa, South Dakota, and Minnesota, and in 1996 got his chance to face incumbent Bill Clinton and spoiler Ross Perot. George W. Bush broke the pattern in 2000, but the runner-up in that contest, John McCain, ended up winning the 2008 nomination. And Romney was the runner-up to McCain, and was a clear front-runner for most of the 2012 primary cycle before winning the nomination.

This time around, none of the 2012 contenders made the cut for the Q-poll, and it doesn’t appear they were missed. Only 1% of respondents selected “someone else” as a choice, although 18% said they either didn’t know or didn’t care. Except for Jeb Bush, who got 10% to finish fifth, everyone on the list is a recent national figure — even the three who finished in the also-ran category, Bobby Jindal (3%), Scott Walker (2%), and Bob McDonnell (1%).

Ironically, only two governors were among the five to make double digits (Bush and Christie) and they came in fourth and fifth, even though GOP respondents overwhelmingly prefer governors as presidential candidates, 59/23. This reflects the problems of polling so early, before anyone has made serious moves to campaign for the position. The results sound more like a name-recognition survey than a serious reflection on preferred presidential candidates.

Also, Quinnipiac shows Barack Obama’s approval rating dropping to 49/45, down from 53/40 in December but up slightly from last month’s 45/46. He’s underwater among independents 44/46 and men 42/51, as well as middle-income voters at 46/51. More than two-thirds (69%) are dissatisfied with the direction of the nation, but that’s been fairly constant for a year or more.


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

PPP just released some similar numbers. While Rubio might be the “consensus” leader, Paul is on the rise.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/04/paul-on-the-rise-hillary-at-new-high.html

cdog0613 on April 3, 2013 at 2:03 PM

Who are the cretinous 10% who chose Bush?

Archivarix on April 3, 2013 at 2:03 PM

Who are the cretinous 10% who chose Bush?

Archivarix on April 3, 2013 at 2:03 PM

Perhaps the people who recognize we haven’t won without one since 1972? Jeb is basically a slightly more moderate version of Newt. Brilliant wonkish kind of guy, a giant in the party, but has some baggage that will have to be dealt with before he runs. I love him for his education reform in FL. I’m not sure I want him as President, but VP or Education Secretary would be a good idea.

vegconservative on April 3, 2013 at 2:08 PM

It is refreshing to see new faces from the Republicans and to see them polling well.
It still won’t keep the Santorums and Schmuckabees from cashing in. Santorum basically does it for a living, no?

Marcus on April 3, 2013 at 2:08 PM

We’re two years away from…

ABC, anybody but Christie

DanMan on April 3, 2013 at 2:08 PM

I’m fairly convinced that by Iowa Caucus night 2016, the contest will boil down to Chris Christie versus Marco Rubio with Scott Walker in a legit dark horse role.

Robert_Paulson on April 3, 2013 at 2:08 PM

2016 is already lost. The “path to amnesty” will guarantee that. The last amnesty not only let the illegals in but their extended families, and if the GOP thinks that even 10% of those illegals will actually vote Republicans – they are dillusional.

Hispanics don’t like Dems because they support amnesty. Hispanics like Dems because theylike their economic policy.

melle1228 on April 3, 2013 at 2:10 PM

Obama’s America, on Drudge

POVERTY SPIKES TO 1960S LEVELS…

Nearly 50 Million Americans Below the Line…

Child Hunger Rates ‘Alarmingly High’…

Schadenfreude on April 3, 2013 at 2:10 PM

I’m surprised Jeb would get ten votes nationally (Bushes gonna support their own), but 10%? Well if there’s one thing we learned from yesterday in South Carolina it’s that there are some people in the party who have very short memories.

alchemist19 on April 3, 2013 at 2:11 PM

We’re two years away from…

ABC, anybody but Christie

DanMan on April 3, 2013 at 2:08 PM

Most of this website agrees with you..

You do know what that means right..?

Christie will be the nominee. :)

melle1228 on April 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM

2016 is already lost. The “path to amnesty” will guarantee that. The last amnesty not only let the illegals in but their extended families, and if the GOP thinks that even 10% of those illegals will actually vote Republicans – they are dillusional.

Hispanics don’t like Dems because they support amnesty. Hispanics like Dems because theylike their economic policy.

melle1228 on April 3, 2013 at 2:10 PM

Then how did Bush do so well with Hispanics in 2004?

alchemist19 on April 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM

Perhaps the people who recognize we haven’t won without one since 1972? Jeb is basically a slightly more moderate version of Newt. Brilliant wonkish kind of guy, a giant in the party, but has some baggage that will have to be dealt with before he runs. I love him for his education reform in FL. I’m not sure I want him as President, but VP or Education Secretary would be a good idea.

vegconservative on April 3, 2013 at 2:08 PM

I don’t think even 8 years of Slick Willy caused as much lasting damage to the country (not to speak of Republican brand) as those of GWB. No more Bush! I swear, I’ll campaign for the Democrat if he’s nominated. Get him a governmental post if needs be, but keep him away from the Oval Cabinet.

Archivarix on April 3, 2013 at 2:13 PM

Then how did Bush do so well with Hispanics in 2004?

alchemist19 on April 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM

By outpromising the Democrats.

Archivarix on April 3, 2013 at 2:13 PM

Then how did Bush do so well with Hispanics in 2004?

alchemist19 on April 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM

A lot of pundits and pollsters say he didn’t.

http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2004-11-28/did-hispanics-really-surge-to-bush

melle1228 on April 3, 2013 at 2:14 PM

We’re two years away from…

ABC, anybody but Christie

DanMan on April 3, 2013 at 2:08 PM

Most of this website agrees with you..

You do know what that means right..?

Christie will be the nominee. :)

melle1228 on April 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM

Christie wouldn’t be the worst President I could think of, even excluding the rat-eared Satan we endure now. He’s squishy on too many issues but he’s a good administrator (and I’m from NJ), and still a prosecutor at heart. We will desperately need these qualities come 2017. That said, I’ll take Rand Paul any day.

Archivarix on April 3, 2013 at 2:16 PM

New Jersey Gov. Christopher Christie, who ran better than other Republicans against top Democrats in a March 7 survey of all American voters by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN- uh-pe-ack) University, gets only 14 percent of Republican voters today.

Only 14% I’m surprised he did that well after his backstabbing performance before the last election. Dems love the fact that he was gushing like a schoolgirl and all but went to third base with the rat-eared devil on that NJ beach. But the symbol of the GOP is an elephant and elephants have long memories.

Happy Nomad on April 3, 2013 at 2:18 PM

OK let us start obsessing about the 2016 elections when we have all the liberal disastrous policies that we have to deal with now and in the coming 4 years…

mnjg on April 3, 2013 at 2:18 PM

We should run Bush. We need a good excuse when we lose.

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 2:19 PM

Then how did Bush do so well with Hispanics in 2004?

alchemist19 on April 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM

Bush was a big-spending Republican, and polls seem to confirm that Hispanic voters like big government. Also, Bush still had a little bit of the post-9/11 aura surrounding him which helped him win voters who likely would’ve gone Democrat otherwise. And last but certainly not least, I think him hailing from a southern state helped.

Doughboy on April 3, 2013 at 2:20 PM

Is it too late to get Rahm Emanuel to run as the GOP candidate? He’s “tough on Unions” just like Christie!

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 2:21 PM

i’m not paying any attention at this point…because i think the left will have enough momentum for 3 terms. But i do think that a vote for Bush is a vote to tell the world that the R party is a dynastic party…and has no new ideas or people.

r keller on April 3, 2013 at 2:22 PM

Zombie Harold Stassen for the win.

steebo77 on April 3, 2013 at 2:25 PM

A lot of pundits and pollsters say he didn’t.

http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2004-11-28/did-hispanics-really-surge-to-bush

melle1228 on April 3, 2013 at 2:14 PM

Some independent think tank I’ve never heard of and some Democrat pollster disagree with the 2004 exit polls. The overall exit polls were pretty darn accurate. If the exit polls overestimated Bush’s share of the Latino vote then that means then they underestimated his share someplace else by enough votes to exactly counterbalance. Color me skeptical.

alchemist19 on April 3, 2013 at 2:27 PM

2016 is already lost. The “path to amnesty” will guarantee that. The last amnesty not only let the illegals in but their extended families, and if the GOP thinks that even 10% of those illegals will actually vote Republicans – they are dillusional.

Hispanics don’t like Dems because they support amnesty. Hispanics like Dems because theylike their economic policy.

melle1228 on April 3, 2013 at 2:10 PM

I don’t think that they can vote in 2016. They must be citizens, but they’ll only be residents.

Gelsomina on April 3, 2013 at 2:29 PM

You do know what that means right..?

Christie will be the nominee. :)

melle1228 on April 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM

Well, whoever gets it, let’s not rush the matter.

Let’s waste a lot of time holding debates so that the enemy can get some great lines of attack the way Newt provided the rat-eared devil with the Corporate vulture theme.

Let’s make sure we get some really biased journalist hacks as moderators so that they can ambush the candidates the way George Stephanapoulus insterted an abortion question into a foreign policy debate.

And by all means lets spend months in-fighting among ourselves.

Happy Nomad on April 3, 2013 at 2:30 PM

I don’t think that they can vote in 2016. They must be citizens, but they’ll only be residents.

Gelsomina on April 3, 2013 at 2:29 PM

A key yet often overlooked distinction.

alchemist19 on April 3, 2013 at 2:31 PM

ABC, anybody but Christie

DanMan on April 3, 2013 at 2:08 PM

So I can count on you to support Palin? :)

Odysseus on April 3, 2013 at 2:32 PM

Notice anything interesting in that group of five early leaders? None of them ran for the Republican presidential nomination for the 2012 cycle.

That’s a silly conclusion. It’s like saying: do you want spaghetti or pizza, and then wondering why nobody chose steak. They didn’t allow any other answers.

Fenris on April 3, 2013 at 2:36 PM

hmmm, this one’s under water…that one’s floating in the water….

…this one over here is bobbing in the water..

I see my Preferred is not mentioned in this article….

that’s ok…..

ToddPA on April 3, 2013 at 2:37 PM

Some independent think tank I’ve never heard of and some Democrat pollster disagree with the 2004 exit polls. The overall exit polls were pretty darn accurate. If the exit polls overestimated Bush’s share of the Latino vote then that means then they underestimated his share someplace else by enough votes to exactly counterbalance. Color me skeptical.

alchemist19 on April 3, 2013 at 2:27 PM

Actually that was the first article I found, but the numbers were dissected pretty much over and over. Bush if he increased the hispanic vote at all it was probably no more than 3-4 points from 34-38 percent. Definitely not 44 percent. Futhermore, it had more to do with his BIG GOVERNMENT programs i.e., DEM ECONOMY than anything else. The case could also be made though that Bush was a SOCIAL CON- pro life, traditional marriage which the GOP is ready to scuttle, so many of the hispanics that voted for Bush may find that they will go elsewhere because the GOP no longer shares big government social positions.

I don’t think that they can vote in 2016. They must be citizens, but they’ll only be residents.

Gelsomina on April 3, 2013 at 2:29 PM

Depends largely on the deal that gets made, and the GOP is not known for sticking to its guns. The Dems are not going to pass something that doesn’t give citizenship in three years and so even if 2016 is in play – 2020 is not.

melle1228 on April 3, 2013 at 2:38 PM

B-but PrimordialOrderedIdiot assures me Rubio is a treasonous worm.

John the Libertarian on April 3, 2013 at 2:39 PM

Some independent think tank I’ve never heard of and some Democrat pollster disagree with the 2004 exit polls. The overall exit polls were pretty darn accurate. If the exit polls overestimated Bush’s share of the Latino vote then that means then they underestimated his share someplace else by enough votes to exactly counterbalance. Color me skeptical.

alchemist19 on April 3, 2013 at 2:27 PM

Maybe you might believe Michelle Malkin then..

http://michellemalkin.com/2004/11/09/bush-did-not-win-44-percent-of-the-hispanic-vote/

melle1228 on April 3, 2013 at 2:40 PM

B-but PrimordialOrderedIdiot assures me Rubio is a treasonous worm.
John the Libertarian on April 3, 2013 at 2:39 PM

He also says he’s never voting GOP again as long as he lives and seems to be fixated on bringing Rubio down exclusively and won’t say who he supports but come on you know who.

Marcus on April 3, 2013 at 2:43 PM

Well, whoever gets it, let’s not rush the matter.

Let’s waste a lot of time holding debates so that the enemy can get some great lines of attack the way Newt provided the rat-eared devil with the Corporate vulture theme.

Let’s make sure we get some really biased journalist hacks as moderators so that they can ambush the candidates the way George Stephanapoulus insterted an abortion question into a foreign policy debate.

And by all means lets spend months in-fighting among ourselves.

Happy Nomad on April 3, 2013 at 2:30 PM

The problem? Obama campaigned the whole 8 years. You can bet the Dem nominees are going to start hammering our front runners hard. They may not be campaigning, but nobody ever tells the Dems that.

melle1228 on April 3, 2013 at 2:43 PM

We will never solve the country’s problems by picking a member of Congress who hasn’t been a Governor. The job is too big for Senators without executive experience, despite their massive egos, although Obama has proved that if the media will cover your incompetence you can party your way through eight years while the country circles the drain.

We need to adopt two hard and fast rules for the next process:

1. No media control over debates, of which there will be no more than 12. They will be invited to cover them, granted after-interviews, etc., but will neither choose the panelists or moderator or have any role in questioning.

2. No candidate without serious successful management experience – as a state governor, large city mayor, military commander, or private businessman – should be considered. Others are simply not qualified and should be discouraged from muddying the field.

Adjoran on April 3, 2013 at 2:45 PM

Some independent think tank I’ve never heard of and some Democrat pollster disagree with the 2004 exit polls. The overall exit polls were pretty darn accurate. If the exit polls overestimated Bush’s share of the Latino vote then that means then they underestimated his share someplace else by enough votes to exactly counterbalance. Color me skeptical.

alchemist19 on April 3, 2013 at 2:27 PM

Bush’s 2004 exit poll numbers with Hispanics have been completely debunked over and over again by Republican analysts, independent analysts, pretty much everybody who has looked at them. Bush actually got about 38% of the Hispanic vote.

Also, in 2004, Cubans were a larger percentage of the Hispanic population, so Bush’s 38% probably translates to about 34% today.

Jon0815 on April 3, 2013 at 2:56 PM

B-but PrimordialOrderedIdiot assures me Rubio is a treasonous worm.

John the Libertarian on April 3, 2013 at 2:39 PM

Regardless, Rubio has bad hair and he’ll lose because of that. Romney is the closest we’ll get to beating Dems.

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 2:56 PM

I decided today that with all this “path to citizenship” B.S. That I will never ever do a “hold my nose” vote again like I did with McLame and Romney. I will not vote for another RINO squish, I don’t care how bad the other side is. Being Dem Lite isn’t going to cut it. They better actually put out some conservative candidates. I truly don’t think I’m alone in this feeling. If the GOP continues down it’s Dem Lite path, they will go the way of the Whigs and Torries.

Minnfidel on April 3, 2013 at 2:59 PM

It’s absurd that these polls never include Cruz, who is likely running. Quinnipiac included McDonnell but not Cruz, PPP included Rick Perry but not Cruz, even those Cruz placed ahead of both those guys in the CPAC straw poll (in fact Cruz placed ahead of Jindal at CPAC too, yet Jindal is in these polls and he’s not).

Jon0815 on April 3, 2013 at 3:03 PM

Then how did Bush do so well with Hispanics in 2004?

alchemist19 on April 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM

exit pols showed him at ~40%. Up 10 points from 2000. If the R gets that high mark of 40+% that means an extra 1% of the vote. And that’s the high water mark.
But Ill bet that much of that 40% came from 2cnd,3rd generation Hispanics. New , 1st gen, Mexican immigrants will vote Dem. The Mexican masses are famously smitten with socialism.

If Mexico had some populist free market figureheads then you could imagine that 1% extra going to the Rs. Either way, you’ll lose more then a lot more then 1% in other demographics if amnesty passes with R support.

BoxHead1 on April 3, 2013 at 3:04 PM

1% = +10% of hispanic vote which is 10% of national vote.

BoxHead1 on April 3, 2013 at 3:05 PM

It is refreshing to see new faces from the Republicans and to see them polling well.
It still won’t keep the Santorums and Schmuckabees from cashing in. Santorum basically does it for a living, no?

Marcus on April 3, 2013 at 2:08 PM

Derangement, it’s what’s for Dinner

ToddPA on April 3, 2013 at 3:06 PM

It is refreshing to see new faces from the Republicans and to see them polling well.
It still won’t keep the Santorums and Schmuckabees from cashing in. Santorum basically does it for a living, no?

Marcus on April 3, 2013 at 2:08 PM

Hee.. I think that is the case myself. But be easy on Santorum He is probably having a really bad month. Like many dogmatic Catholics, he is probably really confused by the whole Pope Francis thing and the emphasis on love and humility over liturgical rules.

Only 14% I’m surprised he did that well after his backstabbing performance before the last election. Dems love the fact that he was gushing like a schoolgirl and all but went to third base with the rat-eared devil on that NJ beach. But the symbol of the GOP is an elephant and elephants have long memories.

Happy Nomad on April 3, 2013 at 2:18 PM

The fact that a quarter of Republicans feel that George W. Bush’s little brother or Krispy Kreme would make good nominees really disturbs me.

Illinidiva on April 3, 2013 at 3:08 PM

Minnfidel on April 3, 2013 at 2:59 PM

This is the real genius of Obama. It’s not possible for the next Democrat to be any worse. So what difference does it make?

He has truly ensured democrat control for generations.

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 3:12 PM

Rick Perrrrryyyyyyyyyyy !!!

bitsy on April 3, 2013 at 3:16 PM

At least it looks like we’re getting away from the idea that we have to nominate the candidate who is “next in line.” Considering that it’s only April 2013, I think it’s for the best that we have a wide open field at this time.

J.S.K. on April 3, 2013 at 3:17 PM

This is the real genius of Obama. It’s not possible for the next Democrat to be any worse. So what difference does it make?

He has truly ensured democrat control for generations.

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 3:12 PM

And instead of trying to fight him the GOP’s idea is to be Dem Lite. I won’t be part of that. I won’t vote for someone again just because he/she is a little better than said candidate. I’m not looking to agree 100% of the time with any candidate, that’s not possible. But on the major issues our party has stood for years on they are caving in because they feel it’s the only way to gain power back. When there’s no difference between Dem and Rep, then it’s a popularity contest and the left will win that most of the time because they control the media. I just won’t vote for some moderate squish ever again. I think the GOP is at a crossroads and if they don’t wake up soon they’ll be done as a party.

Minnfidel on April 3, 2013 at 3:21 PM

At least it looks like we’re getting away from the idea that we have to nominate the candidate who is “next in line.” Considering that it’s only April 2013, I think it’s for the best that we have a wide open field at this time.

J.S.K. on April 3, 2013 at 3:17 PM

Whoever the GOP nominee is, it’ll be someone with a serious case of masochism. It used to be possible for a guy like Dole (or whatever) to think he could win because the electorate tilted mildly center-right, but now that the electorate has taken a hard turn towards statism (whence they shall never return) we’re screwed.

Surely no one with any sense in the GOP actually believes they’ll win the White House in 2016. It’s all for show, which is why you’re getting the young lambs being led to slaughter.

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 3:26 PM

I think the GOP is at a crossroads and if they don’t wake up soon they’ll be done as a party.

Minnfidel on April 3, 2013 at 3:21 PM

They’re done as anything other than a feeble opposition party. The GOP can’t win with this electorate, no matter how “pure” in their “conservatism”. The votes just aren’t there. And just wait till Obamacare utterly changes the relationship between the state and the citizenry. It will get so much worse.

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 3:30 PM

Rubio. He is mainly conservative and knows how to debate.
Rand is good, because he has very excited followers. I just don’t know if he can energize suburban moms. I don’t think they, SMoms, are too big on legalizing pot–like many of his supporters are about it.

Mike from SoCal on April 3, 2013 at 3:31 PM

They’re done as anything other than a feeble opposition party. The GOP can’t win with this electorate, no matter how “pure” in their “conservatism”. The votes just aren’t there. And just wait till Obamacare utterly changes the relationship between the state and the citizenry. It will get so much worse.

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 3:30 PM

I disagree and I don’t think it’s too late. I think actually Obamacare might be the GOP’s best chance at turning back the tide. When the average low info (read Dem) voter sees the actual effects of this utter turd, that some (not all) might wake up. When polled, More people consider themselves conservative. Especially in fiscal matters. But there needs to be a clear choice between the two candidates. I am not willing to give up yet. But I refuse to be part of a party that abandons it’s core principals.

Minnfidel on April 3, 2013 at 3:36 PM

Who are the cretinous 10% who chose Bush?

Archivarix on April 3, 2013 at 2:03 PM

Those who still follow faithfully anything that ‘the three blind mice’ of Karl Rove, Dick Morris and Ann Coulter say, regardless of how criminally wrong either one of them (usually) are.

Myron Falwell on April 3, 2013 at 3:36 PM

1% = +10% of hispanic vote which is 10% of national vote.

BoxHead1 on April 3, 2013 at 3:05 PM

2008-Mcain – the last amnesty pusher got 30%.

The Hispanic vote is Projected to be 11-12% by 2016. Even if amnesty passes those new 10-30million wont be on the roles until 2018 at earliest.

So the fight to get to 40% hispanic Rs is all about a 1-2% swing.

BoxHead1 on April 3, 2013 at 3:36 PM

Rick Perrrrryyyyyyyyyyy !!!

bitsy on April 3, 2013 at 3:16 PM

Nice guy, but he stunk up the joint…

..time for a real man woman to step in and show em
how it’s done…

..here Kitty Kitty….(Bluegill)

ToddPA on April 3, 2013 at 3:39 PM

SCOTT WALKER

rik on April 3, 2013 at 3:41 PM

They’re done as anything other than a feeble opposition party. The GOP can’t win with this electorate, no matter how “pure” in their “conservatism”. The votes just aren’t there. And just wait till Obamacare utterly changes the relationship between the state and the citizenry. It will get so much worse.

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 3:30 PM

I disagree and I don’t think it’s too late. I think actually Obamacare might be the GOP’s best chance at turning back the tide. When the average low info (read Dem) voter sees the actual effects of this utter turd, that some (not all) might wake up. When polled, More people consider themselves conservative. Especially in fiscal matters. But there needs to be a clear choice between the two candidates. I am not willing to give up yet. But I refuse to be part of a party that abandons it’s core principals.

Minnfidel on April 3, 2013 at 3:36 PM

The GOP is headed to catastrophic defeats in 2014 and 2016. But it is more due to the fact that they refuse to convey the actual message of conservatism, not because the general populace is rejecting it.

As we’ve seen with McCant and Romney, GOP nominees that express a disdain for conservatism… well, they lose. That point is something destructive traitors like Reince and Repeat Preibus don’t have the mental acumen to possess.

Myron Falwell on April 3, 2013 at 3:42 PM

BTW – The same ones who push for an abandonment of social issues are the ones saying that Mexican “immigrants” are socially conservative and would therefore respond to a R message.

An order of preztel with a salsa dip.

Ok – I’m done thread jacking.

BoxHead1 on April 3, 2013 at 3:44 PM

If not said on the Democratic side they already has the primary via media and Hillary Clinton is the Democratic Nominee for President and if anyone who wants to run will be called sexist and destroyed.

They have already realized that there is nothing more Obama can do for his next two years and even four if they do not get the house back in 2014. He is a lame duck 4 months into a 4 year term.

tjexcite on April 3, 2013 at 3:47 PM

I’m rooting for Ken Cuccinelli. The next President needs to re-criminalize sodomy!!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/03/1198966/-Ken-Cuccinelli-asks-court-to-reinstate-Virginia-sodomy-law-Wait-what

libfreeordie on April 3, 2013 at 3:56 PM

I actually think trotting out tired old Hillary would not be their best candidate.

Minnfidel on April 3, 2013 at 3:58 PM

When the average low info (read Dem) voter sees the actual effects of this utter turd, that some (not all) might wake up.

Like the people of Detroit have “woken up”?

When polled, More people consider themselves conservative. Especially in fiscal matters.

Yep. For instance, Asian Americans consider themselves very “conservative” and they vote Dem 4-1. One’s feelings of fiscal conservatism doesn’t translate into pulling the GOP lever in the voting booth. There are other factors involved.

But there needs to be a clear choice between the two candidates. I am not willing to give up yet.

I’m not saying you should give up on life. There are lots of things to enjoy and fight for in your life. Work hard. Enjoy your family. Go to church! But politics? The American electorate is owned by the Democrat party.

But I refuse to be part of a party that abandons it’s core principals.
Minnfidel on April 3, 2013 at 3:36 PM

Then you’d be way happier as a Democrat. They might as well have actually performed a late-term abortion on the stage of their convention. Say what you want about the Dems, they don’t stray from their “core-principals” no matter how disgusting.

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 4:01 PM

The GOP is headed to catastrophic defeats in 2014 and 2016. But it is more due to the fact that they refuse to convey the actual message of conservatism, not because the general populace is rejecting it.

As we’ve seen with McCant and Romney, GOP nominees that express a disdain for conservatism… well, they lose. That point is something destructive traitors like Reince and Repeat Preibus don’t have the mental acumen to possess.

Myron Falwell on April 3, 2013 at 3:42 PM

I wish that were true. It would make this all much easier to just blame our own party leaders. I know it’s awful to contemplate, but the electorate is lost and it will only get worse with every passing year. Especially as voting becomes even easier and more common with vote-by-phone technology etc.

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 4:05 PM

I’m in full eeyore mode. Give me somebody young, with a good looking smile, plays electric guitar, can dance a little, maybe can juggle for the masses on a late night talk show…

THATS what this country is looking for. It sure ain’t policy related.

jjjdad on April 3, 2013 at 4:07 PM

I’m rooting for Ken Cuccinelli. The next President needs to re-criminalize sodomy!!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/03/1198966/-Ken-Cuccinelli-asks-court-to-reinstate-Virginia-sodomy-law-Wait-what

libfreeordie on April 3, 2013 at 3:56 PM

You are so dishonest. The WHOLE GHEY movement claims it is about consenting adults. Cuccinelli is appealing because the case at hands involves a MINORs and it doesn’t even involve a gay couple.. He is stating that the Lawrence and the unconstitutionality of the sodomy ban does NOT include minors..

melle1228 on April 3, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Then you’d be way happier as a Democrat. They might as well have actually performed a late-term abortion on the stage of their convention. Say what you want about the Dems, they don’t stray from their “core-principals” no matter how disgusting.

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 4:01 PM

I now consider my involvement with the Romney campaign, regardless of how minute it was, to have been a massive mistake. I will never be that involved with anything like that ever again, especially for a GOPer.

Myron Falwell on April 3, 2013 at 4:08 PM

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 4:05 PM

Got your Eeyore going I see. Sorry. I disagree with you, plain and simple.

Minnfidel on April 3, 2013 at 4:15 PM

I’m rooting for Ken Cuccinelli. The next President needs to re-criminalize sodomy!!

libfreeordie on April 3, 2013 at 3:56 PM

Oh, come on!! You can be truthful with folks here..

You’re really rooting for a Dem who advocates SODOMY
to take place at every public school in America….

..because you ALREADY advocate it in Colleges don’t you??

ToddPA on April 3, 2013 at 4:15 PM

And none of this matters when Palin announces her run for POTUS.

Palin 2016

ChuckTX on April 3, 2013 at 4:16 PM

The American electorate is owned by the Democrat party.

It certainly seems that way right now. But “events, my dear boy, events.”

Missy on April 3, 2013 at 4:16 PM

libfreeordie on April 3, 2013 at 3:56 PM

Oppression! Oppression everywhere!

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 4:23 PM

I’m rooting for Ken Cuccinelli. The next President needs to re-criminalize sodomy!!

libfreeordie on April 3, 2013 at 3:56 PM

O.K., I’ll be pleasant to you for a moment…

I can see why you would be against Cuccinelli..

afterall, you’ve been taking it up the Azz for so long now
with no lubricant, from this Richard Head President,that
you would be crushed if that ended, right??

ToddPA on April 3, 2013 at 4:24 PM

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 4:05 PM

If McCant and Romney campaigned as conservatives, and not as Dem-lites, then I would agree. But because they never did, the premise as a whole is as faulty as East Anglia’s “ironclad” data on climate change.

And yes, the party chiefs should take every single piece of the blame for 2012. After all, they fostered that “Mitt is the most electable” bull on us in the first place. Hope they enjoyed Mitt’s inauguration ceremony… oh snap.

Myron Falwell on April 3, 2013 at 4:25 PM

If McCant and Romney campaigned as conservatives, and not as Dem-lites, then I would agree. But because they never did, the premise as a whole is as faulty as East Anglia’s “ironclad” data on climate change.

And yes, the party chiefs should take every single piece of the blame for 2012. After all, they fostered that “Mitt is the most electable” bull on us in the first place. Hope they enjoyed Mitt’s inauguration ceremony… oh snap.

Myron Falwell on April 3, 2013 at 4:25 PM

It’s a “what if?” scenario. I can’t say with certainty that you’re wrong, nor can you say with certainty that you’re right. I can say with certainty that Obama has been decisively elected twice. And with every passing year more “registered voters” vote. And registered voters have always tracked more Dem than “likely voters”.

I’m afraid we’re quite screwed. We’ve been fed a line of bull that the electorate is “center-right” for decades.

I suppose we could try running a super-conservative (why not?), but when they lose what will be our excuse?

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 4:35 PM

If McCant and Romney campaigned as conservatives, and not as Dem-lites, then I would agree. But because they never did, the premise as a whole is as faulty as East Anglia’s “ironclad” data on climate change.

And yes, the party chiefs should take every single piece of the blame for 2012. After all, they fostered that “Mitt is the most electable” bull on us in the first place. Hope they enjoyed Mitt’s inauguration ceremony… oh snap.

Myron Falwell on April 3, 2013 at 4:25 PM

It’s a “what if?” scenario. I can’t say with certainty that you’re wrong, nor can you say with certainty that you’re right. I can say with certainty that Obama has been decisively elected twice. And with every passing year more “registered voters” vote. And registered voters have always tracked more Dem than “likely voters”.

I’m afraid we’re quite screwed. We’ve been fed a line of bull that the electorate is “center-right” for decades.

I suppose we could try running a super-conservative (why not?), but when they lose what will be our excuse?

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 4:35 PM

We also have been lines of bull by the GOPe that our candidates need to ‘moderate’ and go for that soft, oooey gooey middle because that will always decide the election. Well, Mitt got a majority of those oh so precious moderates… and he lost because his parties’ own rank-and-file didn’t turn out the vote. And then he had a horrific boondoggle in Project Orca (look it up, kiddies) that terribly skewed the vote turnout to begin with.

Forget a so-called ‘super-conservative’ – if we even tried to run a conservative, period, and he/she loses, then the theory might have a modicum of merit. But until then, it’s bunk. And the betraying GOPe falls for it like a battered woman meeting Chris Brown for a therapy session.

Mind you, if the Libertarians weren’t so annoyingly hog-wild on SSM, I’d have converted to their side a while back. So until then, you could consider me a RINO… in the sense that I hate the party, want to leave, and am willing to listen to overtures from willing parties. The GOPe isn’t worth saving.

Myron Falwell on April 3, 2013 at 4:46 PM

2. No candidate without serious successful management experience – as a state governor, large city mayor, military commander, or private businessman – should be considered. Others are simply not qualified and should be discouraged from muddying the field.

Adjoran on April 3, 2013 at 2:45 PM

Have to completely disagree on the large city aspect. Quite a few large city mayors are in place because of the welfare electorate that puts them there. The large cities are loaded with democrats looking for hand outs. I cite Houston as an example. Our mayor has run deficits every year and hides it in bond sales and not funding pensions. If they can do it here I bet they can do it anywhere.

DanMan on April 3, 2013 at 4:46 PM

What I see is a run to conservatism; many on the list are faux
conservatives. See what Romney started? He got right up there on
those stages and Meet the Press, etc. and stated he is a conservative, even though we all know he wasn’t.

I see the trend continuing.

This will be laughing out loud funny.

Amjean on April 3, 2013 at 5:07 PM

This will be laughing out loud funny.

Amjean on April 3, 2013 at 5:07 PM

When the actual conservative base finally abandons the GOPe, it will be hil-a-r-ious to see that party withered to a 9% third-party electoral spoiler.

Myron Falwell on April 3, 2013 at 5:18 PM

Well, Mitt got a majority of those oh so precious moderates… and he lost because his parties’ own rank-and-file didn’t turn out the vote.

Are we really sure about this? I’ve heard it repeated often, but I’ve seen no persuasive evidence that Romney could have won if he simply got the base out. Remember, it’s also possible that he could have lost “moderate” votes with a better effort towards the conservative base. Again, it’s a “what-if?” scenario.

And then he had a horrific boondoggle in Project Orca (look it up, kiddies) that terribly skewed the vote turnout to begin with.

That did suck.

The GOPe isn’t worth saving.

I think America’s electorate isn’t worth saving.

happytobehere on April 3, 2013 at 5:25 PM

Right now I would vote for Palin or Ted Cruz,and stay home for any of the others.The clothespin on my nose in ’08 and ’12 just hurt too much.Now that the GOP isn’t even pretending to be conservative anymore,I won’t put up with thir abuse.Afraid it has gotten to the point that if we are ever to save the nation we must destroy the GOP first.They are aiding and abetting the Progressive Socialists and still riding that “lesser of two evils” horse so many stupid conservatives buy into.Conservative in the primary,Republican in the general will still get you amnesty,gay marriage,and an ever bigger government.

redware on April 3, 2013 at 6:23 PM

Rubio, Ted Cruz, or Chuck Norris.

Mike from SoCal on April 3, 2013 at 6:37 PM

Rubio, Ted Cruz, or Chuck Norris.

Mike from SoCal on April 3, 2013 at 6:37 PM

Chuck Norris’ goatee would be far more conservative than Kristie Kreme.

Myron Falwell on April 3, 2013 at 6:46 PM

Palin, Sarah, of The Barracuda.

ShainS on April 3, 2013 at 10:01 PM

These names are in the public consciousness because they are being pushed in the public consciousness, predicated to the amnesty push

How do people know them? The voices of the media regularly mention them. Did any of them do much to captivate? No.

Those in the public who are wonks already know how this group stands on amnesty – they are working to get it in before the public has a chance to react. My non wonk acquaintances do not even know a bill is pending, thanks to both political parties

This is why the field is so wide, and soft.

Anti amnesty activists despise the roster, pro amnesty can take their pick, and the detached rest wonder who chose these guys

It is like having a blind date with someone picked out for you by your least favorite grade school teacher

ShainS on April 3, 2013 at 10:01 PM

I would take her over this bunch. Charisma and name recognition. Writes her own scripts. Would raise the octane level of both sides. And that would raise the energy of the right – which is dropping like a wet noodle of despair at the moment, except for the naked rage of betrayal.

entagor on April 3, 2013 at 11:10 PM

I think Sarah should Cruz with Ted.

Mirimichi on April 3, 2013 at 11:22 PM

Is this a healthy thing? Sure.

Is when it starts coming down to the primaries, is 20 candidates in the field a healthy thing? No.

Will the GOP please go back to those good old days of smoke filled rooms and have the party bosses pick a candidate. Or let the fights begin on the convention floor?

If I ever see Rick Santorum again I am sure I will vomit.

kens on April 4, 2013 at 10:18 AM