Nate on 2016 GOP

Nate Silver from FiveThirtyEight.com gives Jeb Bush and Scott Walker each a 25% chance of getting the nomination.  He gives Marco Rubio 12%, Rand Paul 9%, and Chris Christie 5%.

I give Paul and Christie 0%.

Advertisements

Quote of the Day

“If the latest round of polls is accurate, Democrats will lose nearly every competitive Senate race, giving Republicans full control of Congress for the first time in 10 years.

This is excellent news for Democrats.

Instead of another two years of the same old gridlock that has turned voters off of both parties, Democrats will get to kick back with a large tub of buttery popcorn and watch the Republican soap opera hit peak suds.

In the House, the Boehner vs. Tea Party plot line will heat up, as several anti-Boehner party rebels are expected to win seats now held by more genteel Republicans. The Senate may end up more like a classic sitcom: Can two grandstanders like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz run for president at the same time without driving the majority leader crazy?

The inconvenient truth for the Republican Party is that it’s not ready for prime time, yet it’s on the verge of fully sharing with the president the responsibility of running the country.”

Bill Scher, “Good News Democrats, You’re Going to Lose!,” Politico

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/09/good-news-democrats-youre-going-to-lose-111467.html#ixzz3EpMWX08G

Progressives and Tea Partiers, Unite

I’ve already noted how bizarre the 2016 contest could be in terms of foreign/defense policy in that we might have a serious GOP candidate (Rand Paul) running to the left of the Dems.  Already there’s talk of neo-cons like Robert Kagan supporting Hillary.

But we might also see some strange turns in domestic policy as well.  A lot of attention is being paid to Hillary’s attitude toward, and relationship with, Wall Street, particularly compared to Elizabeth Warren.  However Hillary runs, you can be sure she’d govern as a friend of Wall Street, as she and Bill have consistently been.

We may well see a “populist” GOP candidate or two in the primary running to the left of Hillary on domestic policy.

What I find especially interesting is the conviction that populist rhetoric should be encouraged among Republicans, combined with a certainty that it would be the kiss of death for the Dems to nominate that “scary” Elizabeth Warren.  Candidates are judged not on the content of their character, but on the red or blue color of their party.

While I know that Warren would be turned into George McGovern, the truth is that if Tea Party voters could listen to her in a “blind taste test” setting, a lot of them would feel that she understands their frustration and speaks for them.  While she’d be painted as anti-capitalist, the more subtle truth is that she is against crony capitalism, and so is the Tea Party.

Both parties represent crony capitalism, and that’s something the Progressive wing of the Democratic party and the Tea Party wing of the GOP agree on.  The Dems are for the rich and the poor, the Republicans are for the rich, but really nobody is for the middle class.  That’s why they have to woo middle-class voters and get us wee wee’d up about issues like abortion and immigration and climate change.

All the 2016 candidates will talk about the middle class, but those most likely to mean it either won’t get nominated or would get painted as a hippie Commie freak in the general.

I don’t know who our next president will be, but I’m certain he or she will be someone Wall Street won’t have to worry its pretty little head about.

Quote of the Day

“The darkest secret in the big money world of the Republican coastal elite is that the most palatable alternative to a nominee such as Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas or Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky would be [Hillary] Clinton, a familiar face on Wall Street following her tenure as a New York senator with relatively moderate views on taxation and financial regulation.”

If Hillary in the WH is good for the Hamptons oceanfront crowd, why would those of us in the Holiday Inn crowd want her?  Bill Clinton’s deregulation policies bear as much blame for the financial meltdown as do Bush 43’s.