I would like to get my observations in now because as soon as anything real — anything beyond media speculation — starts happening, the massive Republican field of contenders will be much smaller, yay, and yet it will then be too late to make some of these observations. The silent primary, going on now, has to do with raising money. That will result in the first wave of cuts, coming soon. Then the debates and elections will start, and that will be the second wave of cuts.
So let’s say something now about the more obvious possibilities. I am mentioning them in no particular order.
Mitt Romney: if Romney had won in 2012, there is a high likelihood that Obamacare would have been made permanent. With Obama’s re-election, there is a real possibility that the whole thing will come out a smoldering ruin. Let this be a lesson to us, children. And Romney is just now climbing onto the climate change bandwagon. Nothing to do but gesture helplessly to the silent sky, which answereth not. Where do we get these people?
Rand Paul: a Paul presidency would do a lot of good things, and a handful of very, very bad things. I think we would probably come out to the good, but that is by no means certain. His odds in a general election would be much better than his chances in primaries. But that is like saying that someone’s chances of passing their thesis at Harvard are much better than their chances of admission to Harvard.
Ted Cruz: this is a man who should not be underestimated. He is very smart, and he knows that pretty much the only thing Washington needs is combative confrontation. He has been a faithful senator that way, and I like him a lot. At the same time, his personal demeanor is too unctuous for me. What makes for a good president is not necessarily what makes for a good candidate.
Mike Huckabee: this is a man whose appeal is to readers of The Saturday Evening Post, circa 1985. That is a strong demographic in some primaries like Iowa, but it is not exactly the wave of the future. His aw shucks persona is enough to make the back teeth ache.
Jeb Bush: he is near the front of the pack now because he is a plausible candidate on behalf of the Republican establishment, and because of his last name. But at the same time, he is winsome, articulate and razor sharp. Once the debates start, look for him to start winning people over. His stances on immigration and common core will be a real challenge in the primaries, but I do think he has the capacity to persuade conservatives that other issues are more important.Ben Carson: a novelty candidate. A good guy who says a number of good things, but he is getting the coverage he is getting the same way a female placekicker walk-on for Ohio State would get coverage. Once the brawl starts, I don’t think he would be long with us. And his views on things like gun control would be a killer in Republican primaries.
Marco Rubio: he is too young, and too obviously being groomed for higher things. He seems like a nice man, but I am suspicious of his groomers, whoever they are.
Rick Perry: if you took Rick Perry’s Texas out of the Union, Obama would have had us at Greece-levels by now. So we can be grateful for that, but still count me among the dubious. It would be fun to see the Europeans try to deal with him though.
Scott Walker: the best thing being said about Walker, as Ben Domenech puts it, is that he is sitting on a throne made out of the skulls of his enemies. He did this successfully in Wisconsin. He is a governor with combative and successful executive experience in a blue state, and not a senator with Sunday morning talk show experience.
Sarah Palin: I only mention her because of her recent comment that her candidacy was a possibility. On the one hand, her behind-the-scenes work of funding and endorsements has been remarkably successful. She picks and supports winners. On the other hand, her ongoing status as rock star in Tea Party circles has clearly been very bad for her personally. She is not in a healthy place, and so forget about it.
“being groomed for higher things”? Like what? I know he’s Roman Catholic, but Pope seems like a long shot. El Presidente de Cuba?
Also, while I generally agree with all these assessments, I don’t get unctuous from Cruz, in any of its senses. YMMV.
What do you think the very, very bad that things that would come from a Paul presidency are? I’m no full blooded libertarian but I like some of their ideas.
My two favorites are Walker and Cruz. Cruz is the best Conservative of the bunch and the only candidate who I think would not waiver or go squishy once they reached the Presidency. His only down side is he lacks executive experience. I think Governors make the best Presidents, since they are familiar with the job of governing and dealing with legislative bodies. Walker is battle tested. He has taken the best the left could throw at him. He won three elections in 4 years, all while implementing Conservative policies. He is a little squishy on some issues, but there… Read more »
The Grand Old Party is fast becoming the “Grand Old Pretense” with their bumbling and two facedness on the recent late term abortion bill. Seems the more things change the more they are the same o’ – same o’. They were not elected so they can tell me “Gee whiz, we can’t get anything done with rolling back the Obama agenda.” They better get in gear the next 20 months or so or I will vote for a third party or not at all since apparently Republican landslide victories don’t have any meaningful consequences.
Benjamin, I don’t think Doug’s referring to being groomed for higher things than the presidency. He means he thinks it’s too obvious that Rubio’s is being groomed by others for higher things, like the presidency.
If Marco Rubio wants to show he can battle crony capitalism, he’s off to a very bad start. You may not get far in Florida without Big Sugar’s backing. But he won’t get far with my by backing Big Sugar.
But he won’t get far with me…..
We need a way to edit these comments. Either that, or I need to proof-read better, but that won’t happen.
Remember when Ted Cruz baited a group of Middle Eastern Christians and then accused them of antisemitism and walked out. Pastor Wilson thought that he must have sensed some dark intentions among the group but it turns out that Middle Eastern Christians just don’t have the cash needed to garner Cruz’s support.
http://observer.com/2014/11/sen-ted-cruz-16-presidential-hopeful-woos-new-york-jewish-donors/
Problem with Cruz- He’s not constitutionally eligible. “Natural-born citizen” has a meaning. It means that 1) the candidate must be born on US soil and 2) born with a father that is a US citizen. Cruz fails on both counts. (Obama failed on one of these. Everybody got fooled into looking at the Kenya rumor and the fake birth certificate like looking at the magician’s assistant while the magician performs the part of the illusion your aren’t supposed to see. It didn’t matter where in the US he was born. It mattered that his father wasn’t a US citizen.) This… Read more »
Query: What are the “bad, bad things” re: Rand?
Comment: Cruz and Rubio are not constitutionally eligible for the presidency.
I see that Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore is still acting as a faithful lesser magistrate.
http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/01/alabama_chief_justice_roy_moor_1.html
I think that there are two issues that our whole nation depends on: 1) Supreme Court – one more liberal on the court and we are done. If that balance tips, the rule of law is gone. Liberals do not think twice about protecting the government, freedom, or the will of the people. 2) Restricting Government Snooping (and having rules for private companies as well) – This may not seem like the end of our nation but a government that knows everything that every citizen is doing all the time is a government under which there can be no freedom.… Read more »
I am confident that the U.S. court system would consider Cruz a natural born citizen.Also, from what I recall of my law school constitutional law class, the Supreme Court has actually ruled that the federal government can choose to discriminate in favor of people who just have a mother as a U.S. citizen (relative to those who just a citizen father) because of concerns about identifiability or servicemen’s children making claims if some such. I say this as someone who agrees that he seems a bit unctuous and as someone who does not want him to run because he seems… Read more »
(sorry about typos, on cell phone)
Chuck, where in the constitution or statute does it say that one’s father, as opposed to one’s mother, must be a U.S. citizen in order for natural citizenship to obtain?
If it’s not written down anywhere with the force of law, it’s doesn’t have the force of law.
How is Rubio not eligible?
Good takes. I think you are being slightly too harsh on Dr. Carson’s chances. He is positioned to be the new-and-better Huckabee. Could easily be the runner-up.
There is much debate about the term natural born citizen and it is a rat’s nest of differing interpretations. Here is an excellent article on the subject: http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/09/natural-born-citizens-marco-rubio-bobby-jindal-ted-cruz/ Rubio was born in the US to parents who were not citizens at the time of his birth. Cruz was born in Canada to a mother who was a US citizen. And depending on how you define natural born citizen, will determine how you view their eligibility. If you go with how the courts/law have traditionally defined it, then both Rubio and Cruz would be eligible for President. If you have a… Read more »
As a Texan, I’d say that Cruz is “unctuous” because he’s combative to a fault. He keeps fighting even past the point where even the most ideologically pure would’ve stopped. Being willing to wrassle is a quality very under-represented in Washington, to be sure, but you still have to be wrasslin’ with something concrete in mind. It just seems that he enjoys seeing his name in lights, and thinks that the best way to do that is to be the loudest. I agree with him about a lot of things, but he’s the guy at the party that you wish… Read more »
So, which of those will be better at appeasing the rubes with soundbites while stabbing them in the back. There was no significant difference between GWB and Obama on any issue that mattered and there will be no difference between Obama and the Republican nominee. The looting of the middle class will continue. Invade the world, invite the world will continue. The ideological litmus tests to avoid being labeled a pariah and unemployable will become more and more strict.
Why do Americans treat their election process as though it were a real thing? As though the candidates were celebrity personalities whose political positions have any bearing on the outcome? Outside the US we see guys holding the purse strings who are quite happy to entertain the masses via CNN until they have selected their next puppet.
If you go with how the courts/law have traditionally defined it, then both Rubio and Cruz would be eligible for President. Yes, that’s how I was approaching it. Chuck et al might be able to make a decent case why the courts and law should define birth citizenship otherwise, but it’s not really an open question at this point. Anyone born on U.S. soil OR with at least one parent of either sex who is an American citizen is deemed a natural born citizen, and that is not going to be changed between now and the 2016 election. Therefore, they… Read more »
Bobby Jindal?
All I can say is that it is good that you’ve finally given up on Sarah Palin.
OK, it also has to be said that Rand Paul is basically the only option. The rest are useless toadies or has-beens. I should probably give Walker some benefit, since I really have no idea what his policy positions are.
Yes, to Matt. Glad Sarah’s not one of your front runners.
And yes to Heather and Bobby Jindal.
Doug, if Chris Christie runs, what do you make of him as a candidate?
“He sits on a throne made out of the skulls of his enemies” would certainly make a great campaign slogan.
Doug, What are these “very, very bad things” that Rand Paul might bring?
I didn’t see John Boehner on the list. As a man who folds easier than a lawn chair, it would be interesting to see how such a unique skill might be applied to the office of President. In any case, it can’t be repeated enough that the President is actually a very limited office. Even if our most perfect hand-picked candidate were to get elected, he (not a typo) would still have to deal with everyone else. In official capacity, he would likely just end up vetoing everything he could. The unofficial powers of the national pulpit would be the… Read more »
You forgot Carly Fiorina?
Somebody who *isn’t* already a politician might be a nice change.
Scott Walker is my man – primarily for the reason you mentioned. Great word picture!
@Tom,
So far Scott Walker is a four-season survivor on Wisconsin’s version of “Game of Thrones”.
Ian, I’m quite sure you are right…at least in part. It would not surprise me in the slightest if the courts got it wrong and found that Cruz meets the “natural born citizen” criteria even though he fails to meet the requirements that the framers of the Constitution clearly set out. In fact, I would be surprised if they actually bothered to reference original source material used by the framers in making their decision. This ignoring of original sources has been going on since at least 1803 in the Marshall court and has only accelerated over time. After all if… Read more »
I like that each candidate is described with “pro/con” included not just a gush-fest over a favorite candidate. That said, this was very high level. Only a few of the described candidates had particulars described at all. I am interested to hear more detail about Rand Paul “..a lot of good things, and handful of very, very bad things” is exactly. The more I learn about Walker the more I like him, but wonder if he even has a chance. Rick Perry seems like he would come off like Bush 3.0 even more than Jeb would, making him a hard… Read more »
Rand isn’t perfect. For instance, I am not a fan of how he capitulates to the Republican establishment on some issues, such as having a strong national defense as a #1 priority. However, as far as I know, he is the ONLY Republican candidate who has any concept of true Liberty and Freedom. Other Republicans want to pick and choose how and when they will coerce the populace. Rand is the only major player who will actually decrease government power and influence. It’s really frustrating that anti- Big Government people don’t see this. If you want less cronyism, collusion and… Read more »
Chuck, I’m not arguing for amending by fiat. I know there are all kinds of problems with that. I’m arguing for acknowledging that no legal impediment to Cruz and/or Rubio running for office will be recognized by anyone with any actual ability to interfere with their campaigns, and that nothing anyone says in the comment section of a blog is going to make any difference as to whether they will be permitted to file and stand for election. But I’m also arguing for the idea that if the Framers did not specify something, then what they did not specify does… Read more »
This is yet another request to Pastor Wilson to explain Rand Paul’s “very, very bad things”.
I’ll even provide an additional aesthetic ornamentation to my appeal.
Pretty Please?
Thank you.
@Katecho: “[Dr. Carson’s] unapologetic stand on difficult issues.”
See his recent apologies re. semi-automatic firearms.