Let the Race for 2016 begin

[imaginary friend]

why they didn't show is irrelevant; if they had all shown up, Romney needed at least 63% to 65% of them to go his way. Never would've happened, and Maximus knows it.

Even then though, he would have needed them to be in the swing states and all evidence is that they weren't. He could've won them by a mile and it wouldn't have affected the EC.

exactly!

[Starman]

Seriously, why is this thread open this early?

[imaginary friend]

"to beat the Christmas 2015 rush" is my guess.   

[The Unknown Caller]

By the way, in response to that piece Maximus has been touting;

http://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeedpolitics/there-are-no-missing-voters
http://www.tnr.com/blog/electionate/109949/there-arent-many-missing-voters-it-seems

...Yeah, looks like there actually aren't 7 million missing votes. Probably not even close to that. And the gap between Romney and Obama is probably going to widen a bit more, and Romney is probably going to end up doing better than McCain and turnout is probably going to end up a little better than 2008 and the white vote probably hasn't declined much. We just need to wait for it all to be counted.

[Inishfree]

Does anyone see for the future elections any good moderate democrat or republicans running for President?

Thanks in advance.......

[soapit]

Seriously, why is this thread open this early?

for therapeutic purposes.

[Tumbling Dice]

Well lets look to the future:

My predictions: Rubio/Hailey in 2016   Susan Martinez and Christie will also make a push. But I really think you will see Rubio and Hailey on the ticket--Not sure who will be P or the VP though

I predict that Marco Rubio will be 'the candidate.'

Marco Rubio is married to a former Dolphins’ cheerleader.  Now that’s a First Lady I can get behind.

[The Unknown Caller]

I predict that we have no idea who the nominee will be and Republicans are laughably deluded if they think they'll win Hispanic-American voters just by picking a Hispanic-American nominee; especially a Cuban-American one. That will be about as successful as picking a female Vice President was in winning the women's vote.

News Flash: Minority groups and women are not stupid and they vote based on what you believe and what you want to do, not what you look like, just as white voters and men do for the most part. If you don't understand that.... well, that's a major part of the reason your party is getting crushed among those groups.

[So Cruel]

I predict that we have no idea who the nominee will be and Republicans are laughably deluded if they think they'll win Hispanic-American voters just by picking a Hispanic-American nominee; especially a Cuban-American one. That will be about as successful as picking a female Vice President was in winning the women's vote.

News Flash: Minority groups and women are not stupid and they vote based on what you believe and what you want to do, not what you look like, just as white voters and men do for the most part. If you don't understand that.... well, that's a major part of the reason your party is getting crushed among those groups.

I agree with you to a point, but there some hispanics who would vote for Rubio to see the first hispanic president, just like their were many african americans who voted for Obama because of his color. If Rubio were the nominee the Republicans would get Florida back which they have to win in order to win an election. He would put Nevada and New Mexico in play also. Remember that in 2004 Bush had over 40% of the hispanic vote, so if the GOP ran a hispanic candidate they could possible top those numbers. Rubio would also bring out some hispanics who weren't likely voters just like Obama increased the % of black voters in the last 2 elections.

The GOP needs to run younger candidates. 3 of the last 4 have been old men:  Romney (65), McCain (72), Dole (73). It will be interesting next election if the GOP runs someone younger like Rubio or Christie and the Dems run Hilary Clinton who will be 70 at the time.

[The Unknown Caller]

[quote author=The Unknown Caller link=topic=20173.msg1304491#msg1304491 date=1352
I agree with you to a point, but there some hispanics who would vote for Rubio to see the first hispanic president, just like their were many african americans who voted for Obama because of his color. If Rubio were the nominee the Republicans would get Florida back which they have to win in order to win an election. He would put Nevada and New Mexico in play also. Remember that in 2004 Bush had over 40% of the hispanic vote, so if the GOP ran a hispanic candidate they could possible top those numbers. Rubio would also bring out some hispanics who weren't likely voters just like Obama increased the % of black voters in the last 2 elections.

I completely disagree with you there and I think that you're missing the point. And, by the way, I think that very, very, very few people voted for Barack Obama because of his colour; probably less than voted for John McCain because of his.

The reason why George Bush carried so much more of the Hispanic vote than Mitt Romney wasn't because Mitt Romney was "less Hispanic" or anything of the sort. It was because George Bush supported more policies which Hispanic-Americans agreed with, including - but not limited to - comprehensive immigration reform.

Look at the exit polls. Hispanic-Americans overwhelmingly support Obamacare. They favour comprehensive immigration reform which provides a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants who are already in the United States. They support safety net programs like Medicare and Medicaid.

The GOP absolutely can win more of the Hispanic-American vote, but nominating Rubio doesn't automatically mean that they will. Yes, lots of Hispanic-Americans want to see a Hispanic-American President, but that doesn't mean they'll support one who doesn't actually agree with them on any of the issues. I can guarantee you right now; if Marco Rubio ran for President on the same platform that Mitt Romney just got slaughtered on, he would do very badly among Hispanic-Americans, certainly much worse than George W Bush did in 2004. Just as Sarah Palin ran on a Republican ticket which did worse than the GOP had among women in decades because although she may have been a woman, women didn't find her in any way representative of their issues.

To do better than Romney's failed campaign among Latinos, the GOP needs to;
1) Continue its thus far incredibly slow process of diversification. That means finding and promoting real minority talent as a matter of course, not just as a few token measures to show you can be diverse.

2) Begin to crack down on the very real element of racism within it.I you don't think this exists, fine, but you're part of the reason your party is getting killed among Hispanic-Americans. Just look at the Arizona immigration law and its supporters, or at the reaction to the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor.

3) Most importantly, change on policy. You can nominate as many Hispanic-American candidates as you like, but they won't win Hispanic-American votes unless they actually speak to Hispanic-American issues and concerns. That starts - but by no means finishes- with immigration.

[So Cruel]

[quote author=The Unknown Caller link=topic=20173.msg1304491#msg1304491 date=1352
I agree with you to a point, but there some hispanics who would vote for Rubio to see the first hispanic president, just like their were many african americans who voted for Obama because of his color. If Rubio were the nominee the Republicans would get Florida back which they have to win in order to win an election. He would put Nevada and New Mexico in play also. Remember that in 2004 Bush had over 40% of the hispanic vote, so if the GOP ran a hispanic candidate they could possible top those numbers. Rubio would also bring out some hispanics who weren't likely voters just like Obama increased the % of black voters in the last 2 elections.

I completely disagree with you there and I think that you're missing the point. And, by the way, I think that very, very, very few people voted for Barack Obama because of his colour; probably less than voted for John McCain because of his.

The reason why George Bush carried so much more of the Hispanic vote than Mitt Romney wasn't because Mitt Romney was "less Hispanic" or anything of the sort. It was because George Bush supported more policies which Hispanic-Americans agreed with, including - but not limited to - comprehensive immigration reform.

Look at the exit polls. Hispanic-Americans overwhelmingly support Obamacare. They favour comprehensive immigration reform which provides a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants who are already in the United States. They support safety net programs like Medicare and Medicaid.

The GOP absolutely can win more of the Hispanic-American vote, but nominating Rubio doesn't automatically mean that they will. Yes, lots of Hispanic-Americans want to see a Hispanic-American President, but that doesn't mean they'll support one who doesn't actually agree with them on any of the issues. I can guarantee you right now; if Marco Rubio ran for President on the same platform that Mitt Romney just got slaughtered on, he would do very badly among Hispanic-Americans, certainly much worse than George W Bush did in 2004. Just as Sarah Palin ran on a Republican ticket which did worse than the GOP had among women in decades because although she may have been a woman, women didn't find her in any way representative of their issues.

To do better than Romney's failed campaign among Latinos, the GOP needs to;
1) Continue its thus far incredibly slow process of diversification. That means finding and promoting real minority talent as a matter of course, not just as a few token measures to show you can be diverse.

2) Begin to crack down on the very real element of racism within it.I you don't think this exists, fine, but you're part of the reason your party is getting killed among Hispanic-Americans. Just look at the Arizona immigration law and its supporters, or at the reaction to the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor.

3) Most importantly, change on policy. You can nominate as many Hispanic-American candidates as you like, but they won't win Hispanic-American votes unless they actually speak to Hispanic-American issues and concerns. That starts - but by no means finishes- with immigration.

I agree that the GOP and whoever runs will have to tackle the immigration issue (among others) but don't kid yourself into thinking that if Rubio ran it wouldn't have any affect on gaining the hispanic vote. There were a lot of african american voters who didn't vote before 2008 and came out to vote because Obama is african american. The african americans who were already voters are typically democratic voters, but a lot more came out for Obama.  If Rubio runs he will bring out some hispanics who currently don't vote just because he is hispanic. You are right in saying that for him to sway a large portion of the hispanics who already vote he will have to do better on the immigration issue.

There are a lot of elements that will go into the 2016 election. It is very hard to beat a sitting president and I didn't think Romney was gonna win. It will be open in 2016 and the candidates the party's chose will be very interesting. If the GOP runs another old man they won't have a chance at seeing the White House until 2024. They need to get younger, and make it clear that they are economically conservative, but move closer to the centre on other issues. If they continue as they are it will be tough to make dents in the minority, women, and youth votes.

[JTBaby]

[quote author=The Unknown Caller link=topic=20173.msg1304491#msg1304491 date=1352
I agree with you to a point, but there some hispanics who would vote for Rubio to see the first hispanic president, just like their were many african americans who voted for Obama because of his color. If Rubio were the nominee the Republicans would get Florida back which they have to win in order to win an election. He would put Nevada and New Mexico in play also. Remember that in 2004 Bush had over 40% of the hispanic vote, so if the GOP ran a hispanic candidate they could possible top those numbers. Rubio would also bring out some hispanics who weren't likely voters just like Obama increased the % of black voters in the last 2 elections.

I completely disagree with you there and I think that you're missing the point. And, by the way, I think that very, very, very few people voted for Barack Obama because of his colour; probably less than voted for John McCain because of his.

The reason why George Bush carried so much more of the Hispanic vote than Mitt Romney wasn't because Mitt Romney was "less Hispanic" or anything of the sort. It was because George Bush supported more policies which Hispanic-Americans agreed with, including - but not limited to - comprehensive immigration reform.

Look at the exit polls. Hispanic-Americans overwhelmingly support Obamacare. They favour comprehensive immigration reform which provides a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants who are already in the United States. They support safety net programs like Medicare and Medicaid.

The GOP absolutely can win more of the Hispanic-American vote, but nominating Rubio doesn't automatically mean that they will. Yes, lots of Hispanic-Americans want to see a Hispanic-American President, but that doesn't mean they'll support one who doesn't actually agree with them on any of the issues. I can guarantee you right now; if Marco Rubio ran for President on the same platform that Mitt Romney just got slaughtered on, he would do very badly among Hispanic-Americans, certainly much worse than George W Bush did in 2004. Just as Sarah Palin ran on a Republican ticket which did worse than the GOP had among women in decades because although she may have been a woman, women didn't find her in any way representative of their issues.

To do better than Romney's failed campaign among Latinos, the GOP needs to;
1) Continue its thus far incredibly slow process of diversification. That means finding and promoting real minority talent as a matter of course, not just as a few token measures to show you can be diverse.

2) Begin to crack down on the very real element of racism within it.I you don't think this exists, fine, but you're part of the reason your party is getting killed among Hispanic-Americans. Just look at the Arizona immigration law and its supporters, or at the reaction to the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor.

3) Most importantly, change on policy. You can nominate as many Hispanic-American candidates as you like, but they won't win Hispanic-American votes unless they actually speak to Hispanic-American issues and concerns. That starts - but by no means finishes- with immigration.

4. Stop pandering to the Evangelicals and take Abortion and Same-Sex marriage off the table of "no compromise" items.

[The Unknown Caller]

I agree that the GOP and whoever runs will have to tackle the immigration issue (among others) but don't kid yourself into thinking that if Rubio ran it wouldn't have any affect on gaining the hispanic vote. There were a lot of african american voters who didn't vote before 2008 and came out to vote because Obama is african american. The african americans who were already voters are typically democratic voters, but a lot more came out for Obama.  If Rubio runs he will bring out some hispanics who currently don't vote just because he is hispanic. You are right in saying that for him to sway a large portion of the hispanics who already vote he will have to do better on the immigration issue.

Again, no, I don't agree with you there. African American voters did not just come out to vote because Obama was African-American, it was because he was an African-American who spoke to their issues and represented their community. If Rubio did that, yes he would bring out Hispanic supporters. But if Rubio ran on the same platform as Romney, there would be no reason for any Hispanic-Americans who didn't vote to show up and he would still get crushed. Remember that Romney even lost among Cuban Americans this year, the first time that's ever happened for the GOP.

I genuinely think that a complete misunderstanding of why African Americans came out to vote for Obama and women did not come out to vote for Palin remains at the heart of the GOP's current difficulties in winning support from minorities and women. To coin a phrase, "It's the policies, stupid!"

[So Cruel]

I agree that the GOP and whoever runs will have to tackle the immigration issue (among others) but don't kid yourself into thinking that if Rubio ran it wouldn't have any affect on gaining the hispanic vote. There were a lot of african american voters who didn't vote before 2008 and came out to vote because Obama is african american. The african americans who were already voters are typically democratic voters, but a lot more came out for Obama.  If Rubio runs he will bring out some hispanics who currently don't vote just because he is hispanic. You are right in saying that for him to sway a large portion of the hispanics who already vote he will have to do better on the immigration issue.

Again, no, I don't agree with you there. African American voters did not just come out to vote because Obama was African-American, it was because he was an African-American who spoke to their issues and represented their community. If Rubio did that, yes he would bring out Hispanic supporters. But if Rubio ran on the same platform as Romney, there would be no reason for any Hispanic-Americans who didn't vote to show up and he would still get crushed. Remember that Romney even lost among Cuban Americans this year, the first time that's ever happened for the GOP.

I genuinely think that a complete misunderstanding of why African Americans came out to vote for Obama and women did not come out to vote for Palin remains at the heart of the GOP's current difficulties in winning support from minorities and women. To coin a phrase, "It's the policies, stupid!"

Palin wasn't running for president (thank god). People don't vote for vice-presidents, they vote for presidents.

[The Unknown Caller]

There are lots of examples though. Linda McMahon lost Connecticut to Chris Murphy among women by nearly twice the margin she lost it overall; in large part because much of the campaign focused around the Blunt Amendment limiting contraceptive access which McMahon supported. Former Congressman Allen West, one of the few black congressional Republicans, was slaughtered among African Americans not least because he supports radical policies like the Ryan Budget which would cause massive damage to the African American community.

There is quite literally no evidence that simply by picking someone of a certain race, gender, religion etc you will win over more of that groups vote, or induce them to turn up more, unless you actually speak to their issues. And again, the attitude that it DOES make this more likely is a deeply corrosive one; it's like Sununu's racist screed that Colin Powell only backed Barack Obama because he was black.