|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by sir_eccles
(Post 11647028)
I'm still trying to understand why there are so many GOP candidates. By some counts there are 18 or more who have or will have indicated they will run.
Surely this will be bad for the GOP as they will be spending most of their energy attacking their fellow GOP candidates rather than Hillary. Obvious answer is money I guess. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by sir_eccles
(Post 11647028)
I'm still trying to understand why there are so many GOP candidates.
The Dems have the opposite problem. There is a clear front runner, Democrats are on the losing side of that two-term electoral history, and anyone on the Dem side who is serious about winning would want to avoid a 2016 defeat -- once you run for president and lose, you don't get another chance. Any serious contender would be better off waiting. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP
(Post 11647066)
The short answer is that there is no clear front runner and the GOP is the party out of power, so it can't hurt to try -- at least in some respects, the statistical odds of a Republican win aren't bad. (All things being equal, odds go against the party that has held a two-term presidency. Obama would have to be overwhelmingly popular in order to turn this disadvantage around, and he clearly isn't.)
The Dems have the opposite problem. There is a clear front runner, Democrats are on the losing side of that two-term electoral history, and anyone on the Dem side who is serious about winning would want to avoid a 2016 defeat -- once you run for president and lose, you don't get another chance. Any serious contender would be better off waiting. Bernie for example. Hillary well I think she is too old now, but clearly this is her only chance, waiting for next time around will not hack it. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by username.exe
(Post 11646330)
At this stage I'm just grateful the Palin looks like she's not running. :thumbup:
Palin says she’s ‘seriously interested’ in 2016 campaign - The Washington Post |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by sir_eccles
(Post 11647122)
Woop woop, Mr Carson, your 15 minutes are up.
Palin says she’s ‘seriously interested’ in 2016 campaign - The Washington Post |
Re: 2016 Election
One of the other issues with so many candidates commencing their campaigns years before the election - their constituents are getting the shaft.
Where else do you get elected and paid to do one job, only to announce that you're going to be spending our time campaigning for another?! You're Paying Ted Cruz's Salary So He Can Run For President: The Q: GQ |
Re: 2016 Election
Clinton Palin dream ticket?
|
Re: 2016 Election
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Nutek
(Post 11647292)
:ohmy: |
Re: 2016 Election
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by sir_eccles
(Post 11646077)
Nope, I've changed my mind, Ben Carson it is:
But pretty much as stupid. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by sir_eccles
(Post 11647122)
Woop woop, Mr Carson, your 15 minutes are up.
Palin says she’s ‘seriously interested’ in 2016 campaign - The Washington Post |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by sir_eccles
(Post 11647122)
Woop woop, Mr Carson, your 15 minutes are up.
Palin says she’s ‘seriously interested’ in 2016 campaign - The Washington Post |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Steve_
(Post 11647318)
Didn't quite say that apparently: Did Ben Carson Really Say Illegal Immigrants caught voting should be stripped of their Citizenship?
But pretty much as stupid. |
Re: 2016 Election
Im worried Hillary will win just because she's a woman instead of for her politics
|
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 6:54 pm. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.