Republicans Need a Champion in 2016 (Guess which two he suggests?)

Politico Magazine ^ | March 3, 2014 | Professor Larry J. Sabato

[2ndDivisionVet]

e are already at the point in this prematurely unfolding 2016 presidential campaign when a glance down the list of prospective candidates can cause most observers to wince. As that seductive and sultry crooner Peggy Lee once sang, “Is that all there is?”

At the U.Va. Crystal Ball, we currently have 11 Republicans and nine Democrats as probable or possible presidential contenders. The Democrats have fewer and more tentative contenders because of the paralyzing gravitational pull of “Planet Hillary,” as the New York Times Magazine described the Clinton operation. The former secretary of state is a kind of massive Jupiter in a solar system that may not have many more worlds if she runs.

The Republicans have a sharply different problem. They have plenty of wannabes but no obvious general election winner. It’s not that we can’t construct scenarios by which this or that GOP nominee will capture the White House three years hence. Rather, it is that no one on the present list seems able to convincingly combat the growing demographic edge that produces a Democratic lead in the Electoral College.

Republicans probably won’t believe this assertion once they do reasonably well in this November’s low-turnout, red state-skewed midterm election; they’ll fool themselves again, just as they did after their 2010 midterm triumph, when the most frequently heard GOP comment was, “Even my dog could beat President Obama in 2012.”

Maybe Obama will be so unpopular by 2016, or the economy bad enough, that the Democratic nominee simply can’t win. But if the general election turns out to be closely competitive, as most open-seat contests for the White House are, who among the Republicans can redraw an Electoral College map that’s strongly in the Democrats’ favor?(continued)

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

if the general election turns out to be closely competitive, as most open-seat contests for the White House are, who among the Republicans can redraw an Electoral College map

On what planet are most open-seat presidential elections competitive? Let’s face it, there is a strong tendency for a sitting POTUS to win reelection - and an even stronger tendency for the public to be sick and tired of the party in power after 8 years. Ronald Reagan broke that trend on both ends - defeating a sitting POTUS in 1980, and seeing his sitting VP win election to POTUS in 1988. But aside from that instance and Washington and Andrew Jackson, sitting VPs don’t win election because the public is tired of their sitting POTUS.

Truman is not an exception, because he was a sitting PoTUS, not VP, in 1948. Neither Harding nor Coolidge ran for a second term, so Coolidge and Hoover don’t break the mold either.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Neither Thomas Jefferson nor Abraham Lincoln ever ran much of anything before gaining the presidency.

Jefferson was governor of Virginia.

[Patriot95]

Of course he won’t. When people hear “Bush” again, that’s all the ammunition Clinton will need.

[elpadre]

I agree with you - totally!

In a primary I always go for someone who has been a good governor or had successful experience as the CEO of large corporation, or senior general/admiral with known positions.

Senators although may have the right positions, are too likely to be poor leaders in the WH. Their strong suit is their mouth.

In the general election I go for whoever wins the primary - regardless. I always vote. Well, I did miss in ‘52/’53 when I was in Korea.