LOLOLOLOLOLOL
Posted on 05/04/2015 5:11:08 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
This is the week when an already crowded Republican presidential field really starts to fill up. One by Mike Huckabee will soon follow today’s announcements by Dr. Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina. Before long they will be joined by Governor Scott Walker and eventually as many as 20 candidates will be running for the GOP nomination. Not all of them are likely to be serious possibilities and the members of this week’s trio are all assumed to be long shots. But the cavalry charge of candidates heading to Iowa and New Hampshire creates a situation that renders moot much of the commentary we’ve been hearing about the race in the last six months. It’s no good talking about Jeb Bush or even Walker as frontrunners in a contest in which no one can boast of even 20 percent of the support of Republican voters and which most of those jumping in can raise enough money to stay in until the early states vote. For all of the necessary focus on who is doing the best at raising funds, it will be the debates and not the affections of big donors that will winnow this group down to the real contenders that will battle for the nomination next spring.
With no votes to count and polls being of little use in gauging interest in a plethora of candidates who are not yet household names, it’s understandable that most of the reporting on the GOP contest has centered on the question of who is raising the most money. That was the whole point of Jeb Bush’s decision to jump in early last December when he embarked on a “shock and awe” campaign intended to make it clear to possible challengers that they wouldn’t have a chance to compete with him in fundraising. Bush’s effort was largely successful. In fact, it played a significant role in convincing Mitt Romney not to try again in spite of what appeared to be a clear inclination on his part to make a third attempt at the presidency. But while Bush did lock up the lion’s share of big Republican donors, he soon discovered that the universe of contributors to GOP presidential candidates is bigger than he thought. After Bush’s initial push, there were still more than enough such givers to fund Walker as well as others such as Senators Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz.
Nor, despite mainstream media coverage that makes it appear that the Koch Brothers and/or Sheldon Adelson will be Republican kingmakers, will the ultimate destination of the money currently in their pockets decide things.
That is where the similarities and the differences between the 2012 and 2016 races come into play.
There were also a lot of possible candidates thinking about the GOP nomination this time four years ago. But the reason why Mitt Romney ultimately cruised to victory is that most where neither serious nor able to raise enough money to make it to the first votes in Iowa and New Hampshire, let alone beyond that point. That is not the case this year both in terms of the level of the candidates as well as their ability to attract donors. This time, even the potential outliers like Carson or Huckabee seem to have a lot more on the ball and will probably survive until next winter when the voting starts.
And that is why the debates — the factor that was most important in helping to shape the 2012 race — may again be decisive. As Bush learned, money may be necessary to run a credible enough but in such a crowded field, it simply isn’t possible to raise enough to dominate and or knock off so many varied opponents. In a contest with no true frontrunner, it will be the debates that will define the candidates for the voting public.
In the aftermath of the 2012 election cycle, Republicans agreed that there were too many debates in the fall/winter of 2011-12. Indeed, the debates began to resemble a reality show more than Lincoln and Douglas. But even with the trimmed down schedule now planned, there will be no way for any of the contenders to make a splash without doing well on the debate stage. Just as important, the debates will be the crucible during which gaffes and unpreparedness will sink candidates faster than the displeasure of a large donor.
That’s why all talk of framing the race must be predicated on the notion that it won’t really begin until August 15 when the first such debate takes place in Cleveland and is broadcast by Fox News. Until then, the field will grow no matter how much or how little any of the would-be frontrunners take in from wealthy friends.
:) :) :)
Let me guess....the one who thinks we should have more HB-1 visas?
He’s delusional. Remember the concept of “low information voter”? Or does he believe Lucy won’t pull the football this time?
I’m ready for Cruz to take a bunch of these posers to the wood shed. Most of the potential field of candidates are not ready for prime time and it’s time for them to get off the stage.
Please keep your answers to under 10 seconds.
Well, it sure isn’t the one who wants illegals to pay a fine and then begin the process for citizenship. That’s really protecting American jobs.
I think I’d rather have someone here on a temporary work visa than someone here illrgally who is applying for tax refunds, housing, social security, welfare and food stamps. In other words, future Democrats.
If he means some idiot debate gaffe could end a campaign, he’s right, but the early panel discussions (which aren’t debates) won’t mean much. It will be mostly lack of money that winnows the field, and even then the Rove-Bush gang can keep the Huckabee-types in as long as they’re needed.
It's good to provide real money to a candidate that I can support.
And I do. Lots don't.
/johnny
Yes, this is what I’m hoping for. It seems that, by the fall, we may have 15 to 20 announced candidates, which is ridiculous. I’m hoping that, if Cruz can dominate the Iowa primary debate , he can then pull off a dominant Iowa victory, after which some of these others who get 1 or 2% will drop out forthwith.
Yeah, I heard some of Carson’s speech today, and was not at all impressed. Although he made some good points, he seemed to ramble on too much, and demonstrated very little public speaking acumen in areas such as phrasing and timing. Also, at one point, he was trying to name members of his team, and had a Rick Perry moment, which did not bode well for debates.
FOX “News” will continue to attack the only real
American in Congress: Sen. Cruz.
Do not be surprised to find
Wallace and the RINO’s at FOX “News”,
controlled by Rove, Romney and Soros,
trying to keep Sen. Cruz’s out from the debate.
They are lower than the lowest scum.
Fortunately, they don't tend to donate to candidates. They just gripe.
/johnny
My top 3 candidates are Ted Cruz, Scott Walker and Ted Cruz/Scott Walker ticket.
I don’t need perfect but Cruz is close enough.
Better a man who will honestly tell me what I don’t want to hear than a man who will just tell me what I do want to hear.
The honest man can be safely negotiated with.
No thanks. I'll vote for a conservative, like Cruz. Just like you. No perfection required. Just a conservative.
/johnny
20 people on stage? I think there will be a 20 second answer to get your point across. They are normally an hour so you figure each one gets 5 minutes over the night. Not a good way to find out about the candidates......when it gets down to 12 then they have 2 hours so maybe each one will get 10 minutes each. It will be difficult until around June 2016 when they are down to 6 or so candidates and then we will be off to the races.
R. Lee Ermey, and Ted Nugent can moderate the debates. Beats the heck out of Candy Crowley. Barf!
+1000
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.