Jindal: I don’t know about 2016 yet, but we should probably go with a governor

posted at 4:41 pm on October 8, 2013 by Erika Johnsen

While disenchantment with our federal government runs at an especial high as the nation watches (or declines to watch, as the case may be) the government-shutdown political shenanigans and the embarrassingly inept rollout of ObamaCare, the Republican governors have come out swinging with a message for Americans frustrated with the Washington, D.C. inertia. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal summed it up pretty aptly on CNN on Monday afternoon:

I don’t even want to engage in Republican fratricide. There are more than enough Republicans fighting each other, going after each other. I do think that it makes sense to fight to repeal and replace ObamaCare, I think it’s bad policy — forget the politics. But we’re also, I’m the chairman of the Republican Governors’ Association, we’re launching an initiative called “The American Comeback Story.” We think voters are rightfully disgusted with all of the dysfunction in Washington, D.C. … Governors are actually proving with results that conservative policies can work. … We want to take back the Republican brand from D.C. For too long, we’ve outsourced it to Washington. We’ve got 30 Republican governors doing a great job across the state capitals, across the country. The important discussions aren’t happening in D.C. …

Honestly, the answer, is, I don’t know what I’m going to do in 2016. … I do think the next president, I do believe should come from the ranks of the governors. I do think that the governors, unlike the folks in DC, are actually implementing solutions. I think that one of the criticisms we’ve had about this president is that President Obama had to have on-the-job training, never had run anything before he was elected president of the United States.

Conservatives on the national scene (i.e., the dreaded Ted Cruz crowd) are getting eviscerated right and left in the media and Republicans aren’t exactly presenting a united front, but Jindal is looking to remind America that the centralized bureaucracy of the federal government is hardly conservatism’s natural home and that governors are making conservative policies work for the betterment of the people in their states. I’m for it.


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

We went with a Senator in 2008, and a Governor in 2012. They both lost, so I really don’t think it’s a matter of who has executive experience or not.

Go with a conservative true beleiver that inspires passion and can articulate a conservative message.

Stoic Patriot on October 8, 2013 at 4:47 PM

You? No.
Christie? F@ck no!
Fat Bush? The f@ck you say? No!

RovesChins on October 8, 2013 at 4:47 PM

And preferably a Governor with B*LLS.

Oh my, that only leaves room for two….Walker
and the other one….and SHE’S not even anatomically correct.

..Oh well….

ToddPA on October 8, 2013 at 4:49 PM

Rick Perry – it will take a governor that despises the Federal Government as much as he does to disassemble it.

HondaV65 on October 8, 2013 at 4:51 PM

There are some good ones out there.

Christie? F@ck no!
Fat Bush? The f@ck you say? No!

RovesChins on October 8, 2013 at 4:47 PM

I agree with you on these two, however I reserve the right to keep Jindal in my queue.

D-fusit on October 8, 2013 at 4:51 PM

I don’t know Stoic Patriot. I think we went with a moderate that wishes he could run as a dem in 2008 and a guy that would not oppose the concept of nationalized medicine in 2012. McCain would have lost by 15% or more without Palin. Romney was picked by the same guys that picked McCain.

The old guard is the problem.

DanMan on October 8, 2013 at 4:51 PM

Mike Pence.

KCB on October 8, 2013 at 4:52 PM

We went with a Senator in 2008, and a Governor in 2012. They both lost, so I really don’t think it’s a matter of who has executive experience or not.

Go with a conservative true beleiver that inspires passion and can articulate a conservative message.

Stoic Patriot on October 8, 2013 at 4:47 PM

In 2012 we went with a one-term former Governor who had been out of office for 6 years, not the same as a two-term sitting Governor with a record of getting things done at the state level.

Steve Z on October 8, 2013 at 4:54 PM

There are some good ones out there.

Christie? F@ck no!
Fat Bush? The f@ck you say? No!

RovesChins on October 8, 2013 at 4:47 PM

I agree with you on these two, however I reserve the right to keep Jindal in my queue.

D-fusit on October 8, 2013 at 4:51 PM

Fair enough, but I think Jindal would be a trifecta…along with McCain/Romney.

RovesChins on October 8, 2013 at 4:57 PM

We went with a governor in 2012. Look where that got us.

They went with a senator in 2012. Look where that got us.

Let’s run a qualified conservative regardless of political resume.

davidk on October 8, 2013 at 5:04 PM

Mike Pence.

KCB on October 8, 2013 at 4:52 PM

I hope he runs.

Deafdog on October 8, 2013 at 5:04 PM

Any combination of Walker, Jindal, Perry, and Martinez would work for me in 2016.

Kafir on October 8, 2013 at 5:05 PM

We went with a governor in 2012. Look where that got us.

They went with a senator in 2012. Look where that got us.

Let’s run a qualified conservative regardless of political resume.

davidk on October 8, 2013 at 5:04 PM

Meh. Kerry and McCain were Senators, too. How did they work out? Dole and Gore, too.

That said, each Presidential election is different. And I think this time, the electorate is going to be eager to get some new blood into Washington. I’m pro-Cruz, but I think most voters would rather see a true outsider. And that takes the sting out of many of the arguments Democrats would make, and gives us some natural talking points.

hawksruleva on October 8, 2013 at 5:13 PM

Scott Walker,
Christie,
Jeb Bush

ALL ARE PRO-AMNESTY

Jindal is a snooze

Give me a fresh conservative senator like Rand Paul or Ted Cruz over those loser governors.

bluegill on October 8, 2013 at 5:14 PM

Yes, yes… a thousand times yes!

Jindal would be great, in my opinion.
He’s not only an Executive… but he also is a Conservative thinker.

You combine the two and you have a great President.

Let’s not look to legislators for our 2016 Presidential nominee. Let’s truly keep the branches separate.

Let’s also start reining in the powers of the Presidency so that we can actually have three EQUAL branches as well.

I think a Governor as President is our best bet to see some real improvement in our national governance.

Granted, it does matter quite a bit who that Governor is.

But…

Jindal or Walker would be fantastic.
Christie would be entertaining and (despite what folks here seem to think) probably pretty fiscally conservative.

But, a Christie nomination would probably cause the mental and emotional meltdown of most posters here… so, I don’t want to see that.

Jindal and/or Walker 2016!
;-)

RightWay79 on October 8, 2013 at 5:15 PM

NO TO PRO-AMNESTY SCOTT WALKER, WHO IS PRO-ESTABLISHMENT and a Jeb Bush cheerleader.

bluegill on October 8, 2013 at 5:17 PM

Jindal is boring and puts me right to sleep. He comes off like a WIMP.

bluegill on October 8, 2013 at 5:18 PM

The problem isn’t the resume, it’s the approach of the kingmakers. They keep trying to find a candidate to fit the electorate. They need to find a candidate who can sell what he believes in. Obama is miles to the left of most of the voters, but he, with the help of the media, sold them. He sold them a bunch of lies, but he sold them nonetheless.

Find the candidate that can explain why conservatism works and liberalism doesn’t. Stop trying to push the candidate who is inoffensively a little bit conservative but might be liberal on some issues because the polls say this or that.

trubble on October 8, 2013 at 5:21 PM

How about Repubs, like Wilson, standing up and saying “You Lie”.

How about Repubs standing in front of the press and calling them out as Obama shills.

How about growing a set, Repubs.

patman77 on October 8, 2013 at 5:23 PM

How about a candidate with no past connection to the federal government what-so-ever?

Shump on October 8, 2013 at 5:27 PM

We want to take back the Republican brand from D.C. For too long, we’ve outsourced it to Washington.

The “Business as usual” Beltway crowd is a growing cancer.

thejackal on October 8, 2013 at 5:29 PM

You? No.
Christie? F@ck no!
Fat Bush? The f@ck you say? No!

RovesChins on October 8, 2013 at 4:47 PM

There are others.

Tater Salad on October 8, 2013 at 6:11 PM

I don’t even want to engage in Republican fratricide. There are more than enough Republicans fighting each other, going after each other.

Gee, Bobby, weren’t you, like, first out of the gate to criticize fellow Republicans after the 2012 debacle, with your “stupid party” comments?

I do think that it makes sense to fight to repeal and replace ObamaCare, I think it’s bad policy — forget the politics.

So you agree with the Tea Party, and support current Republican actions in Washington. Got it.

Governors are actually proving with results that conservative policies can work. … We want to take back the Republican brand from D.C. For too long, we’ve outsourced it to Washington. We’ve got 30 Republican governors doing a great job across the state capitals, across the country.

What’s your approval rating, Bobby, 38-39%? Well, it’s better than 11.

Honestly, the answer, is, I don’t know what I’m going to do in 2016. … I do think the next president, I do believe should come from the ranks of the governors. I do think that the governors, unlike the folks in DC, are actually implementing solutions.

So why don’t you continue to be one? If that’s where the action is..

Bobby Jindal, running against Washington so that he can go there. Oh well, worked for Sarah Palin.

Mr. Arkadin on October 8, 2013 at 6:18 PM

One of our fellow posters said he’d run and, if elected, would not be on TV unless there was a national emergency.
 
I’m voting for that guy.

rogerb on October 8, 2013 at 6:36 PM

I’ll take Ted Cruz in 2016 – thank you.

stenwin77 on October 8, 2013 at 6:43 PM

The problem isn’t the resume, it’s the approach of the kingmakers. They keep trying to find a candidate to fit the electorate. They need to find a candidate who can sell what he believes in. Obama is miles to the left of most of the voters, but he, with the help of the media, sold them. He sold them a bunch of lies, but he sold them nonetheless.

trubble on October 8, 2013 at 5:21 PM

The One didn’t “sell” anything but himself. And he didn’t use political rhetoric to do it.

His entire campaign was that of a cult leader seeking worshipers. “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.” “The seas cease to rise and the earth begins to heal.” “Hope and Change.” “They cling to guns and religion.”

Appeal to the listener’s “specialness”. Prediction that worshipers’ belief in him will give him the power to alter reality. Short, catchy, but ultimately meaning-free slogans. Vilification of the “non-believers”.

Any religious cult type would recognize the MO. As would any UFO “believer”.

The news media supported him mainly to feel good about themselves. (He’s black; they swooned.) Radical academics supported him because they recognized “one of their own”. The far left did likewise.

And a lot of people supported him because of his race, their hatred of anyone different from themselves (a hatred he clearly shares), and of course “More Free Stuff”- which he would take from the “bad” people and give to his followers. (Google “Taiping rebellion, China”, plus “Huey Long”.)

The problem with creating and leading a cult is that when the miracles don’t arrive on schedule, the leader looks less like a messiah and more like a doofus. (See When Prophecy Fails.) Cults tend to disintegrate rapidly when this happens.

Unless of course the leader decides that since he won’t survive as the power possessor, nobody else will survive, period. (See “Jonestown, Guyana” and “Heaven’s Gate cult“.)

Now consider how unsettling the possibility is that Iran or some other radical Islamist state might acquire nuclear weapons.

As opposed to what is essentially a quite-possibly unhinged “cult leader” type being in control of ours.

clear ether

eon

eon on October 8, 2013 at 7:34 PM

Jindal. Perry. Pence.
Period.
We’ll keep our Jr. senator-senior senator after 2014-in Texas, TVM.

annoyinglittletwerp on October 8, 2013 at 7:46 PM

Palin / Cruz 2016

ChuckTX on October 8, 2013 at 8:28 PM

ChuckTX on October 8, 2013 at 8:28 PM

Jindal will have served 2 terms and Perry 3 terms.
Sarah who? ///

annoyinglittletwerp on October 8, 2013 at 8:55 PM

Palin / Cruz 2016

ChuckTX on October 8, 2013 at 8:28 PM

Cucinelli 2013…oh wait!

Mr. Arkadin on October 8, 2013 at 10:17 PM

We went with a Senator in 2008, and a Governor in 2012. They both lost, so I really don’t think it’s a matter of who has executive experience or not.

Go with a conservative true beleiver that inspires passion and can articulate a conservative message.

Stoic Patriot on October 8, 2013 at 4:47 PM

Meh. In modern politics, the better politician always wins the presidential election. Obama was better than McCain and Romney. Bush was better than Gore and Kerry. Clinton was better than Bush. Bush was better than Dukakis. Reagan was better than Carter and Mondale.

GOPRanknFile on October 9, 2013 at 12:05 AM

-i-dont-know-about-2016-yet-but-we-should-probably-go-with-a-governor.

If you don’t know about 2016 how do you know we should go with a governor?

Herb on October 9, 2013 at 11:17 AM