The National GOP on Collision Course for 2016 – The Return of the “Safe” Candidate

Here we go again, the National GOP is pushing such notables as Chris Christie, the Governor of New Jersey (Moderate-Left), and former Governor of Florida Jeb Bush, of the Bush dynasty, as candidates for the 2016 GOP Presidential Contest. Apparently, Mitt Romney finally got it across that he was not interested in running a third time (given the state of the nation, he’s a smart man.)

So what about those that have a fairly well established ground game? Kentucky Senator, Rand Paul, perhaps the most viable candidate the GOP has had since Ronald Reagan (they despised him as well), is making inroads across the nation in demographics previously “belonging” to Democrats, doing everything right.

Therefore the flunkies (i.e. moderate party cow-tow’s) are starting to surface. Moderate Illinois Adam Kinzinger has suggested that Paul would be dangerous to the GOP “given his cuts to the military budget”. He much prefers the likes of Bush, Christie and Ryan. That said, since the budget comes from the House and not the Senate, it is a stretch of the imagination that the Senator would have much impact on the budget – unless he actually won the nomination and then the general election. It’s fear mongering to the base. (Daily Caller)

Of course, the weekend would not be complete without the emergence of yet another Bush presidential run accordoing to the Miami Herald, George P Bush, son of one Jeb Bush suggests his father is ready to run in 2016.(Miami Herald) in the nick of time to save the GOP from the likes of say, a Rand Paul, and lose the General election in spades – once again.

It would be one thing to the casual observer or a devout Republican, if the party let chips fall where they might – oh, let anyone who has the courage to run in the primary do so unhindered by the specter of the national GOP suggesting they should be immediately replaced by their preferred candidate, and then should that individual not make the primary cut, so be it. That would be a fair contest.

In the age of a nuclear Democrat Party, as well as a National GOP is it no wonder individuals are opting out of the parties, and choosing “no affiliation”? Continuing to represent the Progressive ideals of elitism and proving the same by continuing to push forward candidate’s who are in that imagined upper class (Clinton, Bush, Romney), will lead more quickly to the emergence of a third party – the non-party.

Perhaps having no candidate but making choices based on whoever the main parties are pushing. It is what it is, but it does not mean the citizens have to appreciate a party that puts itself above the founder’s intent. Put either one of the GOP picks up against a Democrat Pick, and the White House is lost to the GOP once again.

The Most Interesting – Rand Paul – Dr. vs. GOP and DNC Machine – What this means for 2016

According to Dan Pfeiffer, the top communications adviser to President Obama, Rand Paul is the Republican he finds the most “interesting”. This is due to his outreach to demographics currently believed to be “owned” by Democrats, and his stance on issues that would attract them. However, Pfeiffer went on to suggest that Paul does not have the organization heft. (BuzzFeed)

Buzzfeed is a left of center (for the most part) blogger platform, social media company, so articles written are more in the vein of “the top 15 this or that”. The audience is younger, which is what is playing to Paul’s favor. As to organizational heft, that’s to be determined, it is early in the game.

Although the rank and file members of the establishment GOP in DC have their hearts set on a standard Republican, a Mitt Romney, a Jeb Bush or yes, even a Chris Christie, it is not without a bit of angst on the part of those who would like to see a real change, that they are pushing the aforementioned. The simple truth is not one of them could actually win the Presidency. Breaking it down, Romney is a lousy candidate, nice guy, but he has baggage. It was not so much that he could not have won in 2012 – in fact, Mickey Mouse could have won in 2012, if, and this is the stickler – the 20 million evangelicals would have voted for someone in a religion they believe to be a cult. Simple reasoning suggests that were Romney to run again, the same religious fervor attached to voting, would once again rear its ugly head, and the Democrats could run say,. Biden, and lo and behold, we’d have a Biden Presidency. Bush has the name problem, part of a dynasty and one which there has not been enough time for the blind hatred towards his brother to elapse. Additionally, there is an anti-dynasty push through all demographics, therefore, not acceptable. Chris Christie, no explanation necessary.

What does that leave? Younger, qualified candidate that can attract not only the religious right base, but the independents as well as Democrats (some, not all), which is why this is going to be an extremely interesting race in 2016. If one understands that the vitriol pouring out against anyone who is not one of the Washington three (Romney, Christie, Bush), in the press, is due to the fact that populism is not in their favor, therefore they smear. The problem with this tired tactic is that while they retain their Washington lifestyle, Rome burns. Therefore, the man to beat, in this sense, would be Paul given the fact that there is grudging admiration on the left, and sheer hatred from the “standard right”. Of course that same may apply to Rick Perry and Ted Cruz, and other’s not yet known. This will be a determining factor in the sway of the entire nation towards a more constitutionally grounded government. Sometimes one just wants to throw the whole lot of them in a room, and suggest perhaps, just perhaps, they should let the process go its own way, and let the people actually decide, rather than their fully lined pockets. The aforementioned goes to both sides of the aisle.

Wendy Davis and Hillary Clinton – Matter Much? – Yes and No

Wendy Davis, Democrat from Texas who is seeking the Governor’s office, apparently has had a few problems in the past. She was the gunner for the pro-abortion lobby, and ensured that Texans had the “right to choose”, yet her past is catching up with her. The Washington Post suggests that although she may have problems with her resume (which is not, when right and left clash in print, the only problems), but she had to run for Governor and lose.. The aforementioned makes no sense at all – in the real world, instead of making excuses for Ms. Davis, ahead of a loss in Texas in 2014, why not vet her first, find a credible female Democrat to run in her stead (surely there is one that hold Progressive tenets and has no .. scandals or misdemeanors or jail time in their past?)

Hillary Clinton is being ballyhooed as the front runner for 2016 – Politico reports that she is cleaning Chris Christies clock in the polls – a veritable shoe in, a done deal. While other news reports suggest that perhaps Benghazi may come back to haunt her – are either a factor?

First Christie, not necessarily the candidate of choice for the Conservative does not have yet to declare, nor has anyone else for that matter, and polls taken only pit Christie against Clinton. The danger there is that the public is led to believe that she is infallible and Christie is the only one running. Secondly, Clinton has run and was, quite clearly, robbed of the nomination in 2008, but that was history – the two major political parties appear to play a game of “the loser get’s the second chance”. In other words, should one come in second, one will come in first the very next opportunity. Never mind that there may be baggage now that was not there in 2008, given her close association tot his administration, and the additional fact that the public is growing sick of the Washington elite.

Yet, depending upon who does run, Clinton may be the best choice – baggage and all. If another female with impeccable credentials, a Governor perhaps, who has held the seat for at the least one full term, would do.

Sadly, the public is weary, both sides of the aisle and their respective media outlets, have hammered the Republican versus Democrat battle to the point where one can’t even stand to read an article, listen to a newscast or even get the energy up to care a whit – which is good news if a candidate is not the darling of either media, or exclusively branded with a major political party. Yes, once again, America needs a shiny new toy, to hold up on a pedestal, but this time, the low information voter may not be so quick to choose, and may want more in the way of leadership than slogans.

Which begs the question for both sides of the aisle and both genders – is there anyone at all, without the baggage or the brand -who would risk the backlash and the cash to take on the nightmare that surely will be the next President’s inheritance?

If a woman does run, regardless of which one, for which race, one would hope that the criticisms of which there will be many would focus on their political acumen, their management skills, rather than their personal lives and/or their wardrobe.

Harry Reid (D-NV) – Brings Partisanship to New Heights – Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) – works with Coburn (R-OK) on Bill – Sick of it All Yet?

An article in the New York Times speaks to the power plays by the Majority Senate Leader, Harry Reid and his “uncompromising” position on anything Republican. Apparently, there have been bills brought forth by Republicans which Democrats of like mind might have voted for or against (with dialogue), yet Senator Reid stops all from being brought to a vote on the Senate Floor(New York Times). Reid, the Majority Leader, has the job of traffic cop when it comes to legislation and whose legislation is brought forth, voted upon and sent to the President’s desk for signature. When he blocks one party entirely, he’s playing partisan politics, which, one might suggest, will not turn out well for the current party in power (Democrats, which Reid leads by the nose).

Playing nice, at the moment, is the newly elected Progressive from Massachusetts, Senator Elizabeth Warren, with of all people Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK). Apparently they have co-written legislation on transparency with corporations specific to tax breaks, and the people’s money (both personal and tax) when it comes to banking. The referring article by the Huffington Post notes Coburn as an arch-conservative. - Coburn releases the annual government waste book available here, at www.coburn.senate.gov From this point of view, it’s a reasonable match, as Coburn is shouting government waste from the rooftops, and Warren is shouting corruption and waste as well. The bill will be on the Senate Floor, but the question remains, with Reid’s inability to allow anything with a Republican Label go to the floor, what happens to Warren and Coburn’s noble quest?

Reid is now in a position to play this either way – for example: He may shut it down entirely as it would appear that a Republican has something to offer and to be bi-partisans should it go to the Senate floor for a vote or, he can allow the vote – giving the one most likely to run for the Democrat Nomination for President (Elizabeth Warren), a leg up so to speak.

Meanwhile, all the worthwhile and the worthless legislation that both parties are writing (as that is the job they are hired to do), sits and nothing gets done – and Reid rules over a do-nothing Senate – if he were slightly less moral, one might liken him to the mad ruler of Rome, Caligula (referring to the madness of Power).

As the general voting public on both sides including rank and file Democrats and Republicans as well as Tea Party and Progressive, are growing more leery by the day of the partisanship shown on both sides. It is as if two big bullies are running the nation – into the ground. Which brings up a point – if one of each of what is seen as the more radical factions of both parties, actually makes a run at the Presidency and or any office for that matter, and avoids the general label of D or R – it follows that that individual would endear themselves to the public – the voting public.

A perfect example of such is the recent brouhaha over Chris Christie and his Turnpike Scandal. Not a fan of the Governor on some points, the level of partisan rhetoric coming from the Democrats, and stony silence from the Republican’s is ridiculous. The man took responsibility for something he was unaware of, and that shows leadership. Of course, the Republicans have some grievances with Christie as they felt he should not have embraced the President during the crisis of Hurricane Sandy, while Mitt Romney, the second worse candidate in recent memory, was trying to unseat the worst President since Jimmy Carter. Blaming Christie is ridiculous, as Romney was not supported by either the right wing evangelicals as well as the Tea Party! – When 20 million voters stay home, it’s time to change strategy. Not likely as they are having Bush delusions (Jeb Bush) and the Democrats are currently in love with Hillary Clinton. One might suggest that none of those mentioned in the preceding, will actually make it through the nominating process.

Which point, one of the most progressive individuals one might meet, suggested, who cares about Christie, why is this even news? This is referring, of course, to the labels - again.

Keep it up Harry, the DNC and the RNC and soon we will have new parties develop which are long past due. The public is becoming increasingly aware and increasingly Independent (or not affiliated with any political party)

As One Million in California See Blue Cross Blue Shield Cancel Health Insurance, Chris Christie polls fine in the Northeast – but nowhere else – The curse of the moderate

br>
Obama care has struck again – this time in California Blue Cross has issues cancellation notices to one million people, due to – yes, you got it, Obama care (CBS Local). Darn that Ted Cruz and his 21 hour speech imploring the senate to do anything to stop the rollout and just take a second look at the program! So many watched the junior Senator from TX recite Dr. Seuss as part of the nation’s news in pieces designed to make him look like an idiot, that they failed to understand that he was trying to call attention to an impending disaster. (Also he was reading bedtime story to his children who were not in DC.) We know how that turned out, Ted tried to warn everyone, was blasted by John McCain and McCain and his buddy Harry Reid, just pushed that Obama care through - we know who to blame at least - it's not Ted.

Therefore we are at a crossroads in this nation between those who go along to get along (McCain should have his name next to that one (along with Graham and so many of that ilk), and those who care less about their “political futures” and more about the process – and there are one or two or even four of those – sadly.

Enter Chris Christie, or Mitt Romney light – Chris Christie has no signature health care plan in New Jersey upon which to run, he is not yet “severely conservative”, but he is treading that thin line where those who are both Democrats and Republican’s cannot figure out which party he should belong to – and that’s fine in New Jersey, New York, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the other 7 states where Obama enjoys above average approval ratings.

Once one leaves those states and is campaigning as a Republican (Hypothetically) as Christie has yet to announce a candidacy as it is far too early), one finds people are not – in the least “moderate” – it’s not the DC Beltway, It’s not New Jersey, it’s not Massachusetts. Christie doesn’t have a savvy political director who will stick an ideological look alike in some like minded state, run one for Governor, and then use the same campaign to roll out nationwide. It takes a whole lot of cash and an army of Community Organizers to be successful in that endeavor. Therefore, once Christie leaves the safe zone, he enters the part of the nation where a recent NBC poll suggests that 2/3 of those outside of the safe zone, prefer anybody else to Christie (The Week). Therefore one might understand that Christie might get a few Democrats to switch sides (always the GOP idea), but, will lose the 20 million or so grassroots voters how will, once again, sit out an election rather than vote for a candidate they do not remotely like.

It’s a challenge for the GOP/RNC to see past the hope that they can front a moderate candidate that will appeal to the base of the Party –or Independents for that matter –and that costs them elections – since this has happened on more than once occasion, one must draw a conclusion that those running the national party either don’t get out much, or are clueless.

To be kind – it may be Beltway syndrome, where, once inside the D.C. beltway, one cannot see the forest through the trees, and just fails to understand what is taking place mere miles away, thus, insuring that eventually, elections will be lost.

They don’t’ like people who shake up the old apple cart – that Seussing Ted Cruz, or anyone who might actually suggest something is amiss in Candy Land.

Good luck to them as the coming landslide of support for someone other than a “chosen candidate” may leave them with little choice but to “go along to get along” – only this time, unlike 2008, that candidate will not put up with any shenanigans by the insiders of the “party”. Chances are that this next round of candidates might be more independent minded.

We can only hope so.

Meanwhile, those in the RNC scouting team might want to meet potential candidates in say Iowa, and see if the surrounding audience is holding their noses at any time – and then not waste a dime doing more. – It is highly doubtful that will happen.

They will, undoubtedly lose again, and then the boobie prize for the American Public will be President “Hiawatha” Warren, or Lizzy Warren, a common name for the women who rose to Scott Brown’s seat, zip for experience, and ready to roll into the white house, the nickname is twofold – she claimed she was American Indian in order to land a job at Harvard, and two, for kicks Lizzie Borden beat a murder rap, it’s possible that in Massachusetts Style, as has happened before, Ms. Warren could dupe a nation – we’ve been there before.

2016 – Elizabeth Warren vs. Ted Cruz – What are the Odds?

Elizabeth Warren (MA-D) and Ted Cruz (TX-R) - image from Fox News

One would think given the media’s attention to a Hillary Clinton Presidency might recall that there was a little known Harvard professor who was already “christened” so to speak to run for higher office, once she won the Senate Seat in “safe “Massachusetts, that would be - the very junior Senator Elizabeth Warren, where the Fix at the Washington Post queries “Why Elizabeth Warren Should Care Hillary Clinton.”.. That rising star of the left, grounded in the protests of the 1% (taking credit for and most probably a force behind) will rise from the ashes of Barack Obama’s presidency like a Phoenix. It is the Progressive-Democrat machine that see’s the possible in the currently improbable – a zero experience Senator with little to no legislative background, or managerial background, running and winning the Democrat nomination for President in 2016. It happened in 2008, so why not go with that again?

Over on what is characterized as the “far-right” – or is anyone who can possibly muddy the water for those entrenched politicians in DC regardless of party – is both Senator Ted Cruz and Senator Rand Paul, Cruz a relative newcomer with a little more time in the Senate and the gravitas that Warren Lacks, and Paul, more Libertarian, and liked (at this point) by the media, has slightly more experience in the Senate, and also, as a doctor, he’s run a business. Of these two, the media maligns one completely (the rabble rousing Cruz, the other, Paul, is currently being given a pass, while there is that slight hint of “fringe “applied. The media focus on the Republican Side is, of course, the Govenor of New Jersey, who, in the eyes of the Republican Base is about as Conservative as Hillary Clinton, but perfect for the RNC – He would be John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Olivia Snow all rolled into one package – perfect to run, and loose a national election.

The most likely scenario at this point is that Clinton will be replaced by Warren, and the Christie will be force fed to the base – (see McCain, Romney), and as has happened in the past two elections – the base will stay home. God help us all.

Alternately- if the Republican base is serious – and the Libertarian’s are enamored of a candidate that can strike a tone with the populace – then things may shake out differently – Either Cruz or Paul could conceivably win the primaries, and then politics as usual in this nation would come to a screeching halt.

The media is laying the groundwork against one in particular – the “far left” media such as the Huffington Post, Salon, et al. al – takes every swipe possible at Cruz, and the middle media (or mainstream) just jumps on board – to date they have a Cuban-American – born in Canada (which is turning a lot of media bloggers and progressives into despised “birthers”), since the mantra of “not eligible” for Presidency due to being born in Canada is debunked, they also found that while in college he was competitive, aggressive, brilliant and he got extremely drunk – once. (Huffington Post). Cruz made an appearance on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno, and Leno played the part of NBC Journalist rather than entertainment manager – asking Ted Cruz, asking Cruz accusatory questions regarding his “polices” – in answers Cruz managed to get the audience approval – rather than that of the beleaguered late night host – he held his own. To watch a full clip of the Cruz appearance on the Tonight Show – visit – the You Tube – Tonight Show Channel - A necessary step today to see what actually happened in any setting where video is avail be and reported upon, is to watch the entire footage – that’s where the media editorializes content on what one missed, giving a slightly different take on what actually occurred.

The most improbable at this point – A Ted Cruz Elizabeth Warren match-up – which would truly be a match of left versus right, rather than a matchup of luke-warm left, versus luke-warm right, or a campaign boiled down to 3 slogan’s on either side. Should the base decide to throw the RNC and subsequent Committee’s under the proverbial bus in favor of either of the aforementioned candidates, and those Republican’s in states not Massachusetts, New Jersey, Hawaii, or one of the 10 where Obama’s approval is far above the national average, will be vote for an Altenrative to Chriistie in a heart-beat – It would be the first election in 16 years where the right would seriously influence a win, rather than sitting home, and where, in an absurd return to the repetition of history, a new McGovern would be born.

President Say’s “Sorry” you’re Losing Your Health Insurance – People See Foot in Mouth – Media Reacts -2016 Begins in Ernest

Last night the President on NBC News told the American People that he was sorry they were losing their health insurance, but not to worry, he was sure they would just love the new plans that had better coverage and cost less. This prompted TIME to write Another Stunning Reversal in President Obama’s Talking Points on Obama Care":

For the second time in as many months, President Barack Obama has dramatically changed his communications strategy for coping with the troubled rollout of his signature legislation. In an interview Thursday with NBC‘s Chuck Todd, the President apologized for the fact that some people in the individual insurance market had found their health plans canceled under the new law, in violation of Obama’s promise that “if you like your plan, you can keep it.” “Even though it’s a small percentage of folks who may be disadvantaged, you know, it means a lot to them,” Obama said Thursday. “And it’s scary to them. And I am sorry that they, you know, are finding themselves in this situation, based on assurances they got from me.” He also hinted that he would support efforts, possibly through legislation, to address the problem.

(TIME)

Stunning to say the least – is TIME’s coverage of the President’s latest about face. He’s the “Boy who’s cried wolf” and if the public isn’t buying it anymore, the news media wants to keep some of its sagging rankings so they are (sort of) jumping on the public bandwagon.

Rasmussen was polling last evening on the overall Approval of Obama, and the line-up they perceive for 2016 – paired as potential protagonists in this latest installment of “we are just guessing at who might want to clean up the biggest mess in U.S. History”: Hillary Clinton and Chris Christie – they did not offer “None of the Above. One might conclude with results not yet posted, that Christie trumps. Of course, calling blue states for that match-up is somewhat of a no-brainer, they should have paired Cruz or Paul with Elizabeth Warren. Those results would have been a real understanding of the depth of rejection by the people of the “party lines”.

As a reminder: Ted Cruz will be on the Jay Leno program tonight. It will interest to see the Senator from Texas interact in a setting that is more entertaining in nature. Additionally, one does not get invited to the Today Show or Letterman’s attempt at an evening talk show, without being tagged as a potential – star of some nature. It’s at this time when those who might be running for President get the call to go on-air in a more casual setting. Therefore, this is of import to Cruz in two ways: Cruz will be able to once again, say “I told you so, not without a bit of explanation, thereby educating more people about Obama care than say – CSpan. Two, he is afforded the opportunity to show America he’s not the crazy person they might think he is – reaching the low-information voters who are sick and tired of the two party system. The outcome, insignificant as it may seem, may speak volumes about Cruz’s “stock”.

2016 – Speculation Taking Shape, Polling has begun, Clinton, Rubio, Christie, Ryan, Bush III

One might think Senator Paul has made a decision - rather people (and businesses selling cups, stickers, etc.) are hopeful - image from the Jeenyus Corner

It goes without saying that the political arena, not unlike Professional Wrestling, is a sport that draws in a segment of the population that is always seeking the “next best”, yet generally winds up rooting for the “lesser of two evils” team. With each election cycle there is hope, and then, those hopes are dashed, no matter who the candidate may be – and no matter which side of the political fence one sits upon.

2016 is starting to look eerily similar to those past elections, yet, dollars to doughnuts the actual contenders are those that are not yet in the spotlight – hopefully.

Quinnipiac Polling got the ball rolling with a hypothetical match-up between Hillary Clinton and ”top 2016 GOP Presidential Picks”, Chris Christie, Mark Rubio and Paul Ryan. In this poll, Clinton bests all three by double digits. (CP Poll) Of course, that poll was conducted prior to Rand Paul’s magnificent stand in the Senate, or prior to the Bush dynasty rolling out former FL Governor, Jeb Bush as a potential.

One should understand that although it appears the spot “belongs” to Hillary Clinton, considering her own party ditched her popular vote for the more progressive and younger Barack Obama, that said, all will depend on the mood of the nation by the time 2016 rolls around. In addition, it also greatly depends on the GOP and those who would pick a McCain or a Romney rather than someone who would actually energize the base as well as appeal to individuals on both sides of the aisle. Additionally someone who would honestly treat the media, as the media is going to treat them and be prepared to go head to head, not only with the group of GOP hopefuls, but the Press and the crazies from both parties.

It is with a heavy heart, that as a feminist would felt that 2008 was a no-brainer, with an adept Clinton leading the field of lightweights and the inexperienced (from both tickets) one fears that that ship has sailed. Although she had pulled away from the Obama Administration early enough, there is that connection, her health (which can be used by her competitors, her opposition and the media) and the dark side of her party, who would choose another half-term Senator, a woman, rather than allow Clinton her “due”. Unfortunately, one cannot just vote for “any” woman, no matter how “pretty” a picture that woman might make (or grandmotherly, take your pick) – It is confidence and quality - and the fact that historically there was a three decade gap between the first woman to grace a major party presidential ticket (Democrats, Ferarro), and the last to do so (Republican’s Palin).

The polling turns: A Recent McClatchy-Marist Poll shows a general downturn in popularity (both personal and job performance) for the President, as well a general dislike to both parties in Congress – although the Democrats fare slightly better, their numbers are not much to crow about. The Republicans’ find themselves on the right side of the budget cuts, but by a mere 2 points, compared to the President, in other words there exists a general distrust for both parties.

Enter Rand Paul – Dr. Filibuster, and the son of Ron Paul, the perennial Libertarian – GOP candidate who has, what one might think a small following, but it is a significantly motivated following. Rand Paul, unlike his father is getting press that puts him in contention. He is to be admired as a principled servant of the people and his Libertarian streak is what causes groups as diverse as Code Pink and the hard right to applaud his efforts.

There are those who already speculate that he is running in 2016 - That he will be a major player, the Washington Post, for one, and the UK’s Guardian suggests Paul’s odds are better than most at this time.

Then again, Jeb Bush is out there, and although he may be extremely capable – imagine the yawn, a Bush-Clinton match-up might be?

Should the good Doctor decide to run, (at the moment he is bolstering his 2016 Senate Campaign), it would be all bets off – but again – it is far too early to tell. One things is certain, what the nation needs is someone who is not wedded to either major political party – one that is capable of pushing aside the leadership and their status quo of divisive politics, to lead both the right and the left – similar to, but not Ronald Reagan, (the litmus test must go) rather a new breed of servant that would lead with the intent to put the people over the political machine.