Quote:
Originally Posted by Torplexed
If I were to lay odds, I'd say we are looking at a Bush vs. Clinton race in 2016. Shades of 1992, except for the oddball Ross Perot Reform Party factor. Maybe somebody can talk Ted Cruz and Sarah Palin into a Tea Party side show run, so the race has some entertainment value.
And the last names of both potential candidates are a double-edged sword, although probably more so for Bush than Clinton.
|
Being an independent without a party, I tend to view all politics as a sort of chess game. That said, a Cruz/Palin or any other sort of Tea Party-ish 3rd party run would have a negative impact on the GOP vote count much like Perot had on GHWBush in 1992...
BTW, I'm one of those '1-in-5' Americans who voted for Perot; couldn't really bear either of the two (Bush/Clinton) although Clinton did surprise: left the White House with a balanced budget (without the need for a GOP insistence only a Constitutional amendment could achieve this result); a budget surplus; and a US not involved in heavy military action outside of the country. This is a far better set of accomplishments the two Bush bookend administrations that came before and after Clinton...
...and I'm still not really liking any of the candidates from either party, so far. It's going to be a tough decision
<O>