2016 elections - because it's never too early

[Hansmeister]

Well, the link got updated and the numbers came in at 85,000 books, which given an $14 million advance and a massive publicity blitz is pretty bad.  They will never come close to recuperating their expenses.

A quarter century in the political limelight without any real accomplishments to show for it and she is yesterday's news. No wonder the left is getting antsy as she is trying to get coronated as the Democratic nominee. Democratic primaries tend to be somewhat unpredictable, favoring outsiders over establishment candidates.  Democrats usually only nominate establishment candidates when they think that the odds are against them

The GOP tends to always nominate the "natural" next in line.

The Republican attack machine needs better lines.  Someone who is "yesterday's news" shouldn't actually be in the news when the claim is made.  But the Republicans havent been big on logic for some time.

Look at the tv ratings for her appearances, most of those shows are yesterday's news. There was no bump in ratings for her appearances. She is simply uninteresting, particularly to anyone under the age of 40.

[crazy canuck]

Look at the tv ratings for her appearances, most of those shows are yesterday's news. There was no bump in ratings for her appearances. She is simply uninteresting, particularly to anyone under the age of 40.

If she is so uninteresting why must you convince people that is true.

[Viking]

Huntsman is a joke. A colorless, substance less politician who hides behind mush because he either lacks conviction or is afraid of taking a position.  He exemplifies why most supposedly "moderate" politicians represent the worst in politics.

You can be a moderate like Giuliani, Christie, or Manchin who hold strong, but unorthodox, position or you can be a colorless weasel who either lack a core or spend most of their time hiding it in order to not offend anyone.

I refer you to Viking's variant of O'Sullivan's Law

O'Sullivan's Law states that any organization or enterprise that is not expressly right wing will become left wing over time. The law is named after British journalist John O'Sullivan.

In my case, any radical or utopian organization or enterprise will become extremist over time. This is what is happening to the Tea Party. No matter what successes it might have it will never achieve it's objective, simply because the objective is actually unreachable without massive bloodshed. So the revolution starts to eat it's own. Cantor is a latter day Robespierre going to the Tea Party version of the Guillotine (K-Street).

[garbon]

Well, the link got updated and the numbers came in at 85,000 books, which given an $14 million advance and a massive publicity blitz is pretty bad.  They will never come close to recuperating their expenses.

A quarter century in the political limelight without any real accomplishments to show for it and she is yesterday's news. No wonder the left is getting antsy as she is trying to get coronated as the Democratic nominee. Democratic primaries tend to be somewhat unpredictable, favoring outsiders over establishment candidates.  Democrats usually only nominate establishment candidates when they think that the odds are against them

The GOP tends to always nominate the "natural" next in line.

The Republican attack machine needs better lines.  Someone who is "yesterday's news" shouldn't actually be in the news when the claim is made.  But the Republicans havent been big on logic for some time.

Look at the tv ratings for her appearances, most of those shows are yesterday's news. There was no bump in ratings for her appearances. She is simply uninteresting, particularly to anyone under the age of 40.

I love Hillary and would totally vote for her. I don't watch many televised appearances and until today had never purchased a memoir by a politician.

[Sheilbh]

In my case, any radical or utopian organization or enterprise will become extremist over time. This is what is happening to the Tea Party. No matter what successes it might have it will never achieve it's objective, simply because the objective is actually unreachable without massive bloodshed. So the revolution starts to eat it's own. Cantor is a latter day Robespierre going to the Tea Party version of the Guillotine (K-Street).

Neil Kinnock (not Tony Blair) got it brilliantly, bravely right:
http://youtu.be/bWLN7rIby9s

Though I don't think that does apply to the Tea Party. Also, frankly Eric Cantor is no Robespierre. There's no-one who's ever talked of his virtue.

I hear many people on the Dem side excited about him but I've yet to see, even the moderate Republicans I know, have more than vague pleasantries to say about him.

In fact, I can't even feel myself particularly moved for him.

Which is a crying shame. Sad truth is Huntsman made a strategic error in in effect doubling down. It's like he thought conservatives wouldn't support him because he'd worked for Obama so he might as well run for the diminishing small Berkut wing of the Republican party.

The truth is he was the best conservative option in that race. He should have tried to run the campaign Romney did (which was based entirely on flim-flamery and deception) because he was a successful, genuine social and economic conservative who'd been a successful reforming Governor. I think he would've won against Obama and I think he would've been a pretty successful reforming, conservative President too.

[Caliga]

The GOP tends to always nominate the "natural" next in line.

Hopefully that doesn't hold true in 2016, because IIRC the runner up to Romney was Santorum.

I don't know that the Democrats are usually any different.  In 2004 they nominated Kerry, in 2000 they nominated Gore.  I will give you Obama and maybe Clinton, but I don't think that Dubya was the natural next in line in 2000 either.

[Sheilbh]

Well, the link got updated and the numbers came in at 85,000 books, which given an $14 million advance and a massive publicity blitz is pretty bad.  They will never come close to recuperating their expenses.

I agree with you on Hillary in general.

But over here publishing has got badly burned by giving ridiculous advances to politicians only to discover there's actually a very small market for political memoirs/autobiographies/ and very few break through. The best, in my experience, are from the people who never actually get to the top. I think the actual leaders are best served by biographers, after they've died - see Charles Moore on Thatcher. Your Alan Clarks and Chris Mullins are far more interesting and engaging company than most senior ministers/former leaders.

Huntsman is a joke. A colorless, substance less politician who hides behind mush because he either lacks conviction or is afraid of taking a position.  He exemplifies why most supposedly "moderate" politicians represent the worst in politics.

His tone and style were moderate. His positions and his record was the most consistently and successfully conservative of any of the 2012 candidates. He was stupid enough not to run in that way. But I don't think he was helped that the non-mainstream media have made conservatism into a bit of a post-modern entertainment, not a philosophy.

[Admiral Yi]

he was a successful, genuine social and economic conservative

What do you mean by this?

[Sheilbh]

What do you mean by this?

Which bit should I explain? Successful and genuine or social and economic conservative?

[Admiral Yi]

The latter.

[Sheilbh]

He supported the Ryan budget and reform of Social Security. He wanted to privatise Fannie and Freddie and repeal NCLB. His economy proposals were all very free market - the big ones were tax reform, regulatory reform and free trade. His tax plan was particularly striking (and a little more fleshed out) in that it was more plausible than anything else a GOP candidate proposed (9-9-9), but also called for solid conservative things like eliminating double taxation of capital gains and closing corporate loopholes, but generally reducing taxes. He was opposed to all sorts of corporate welfare and said you should abolish farm subsidies. On healthcare he wanted to abolish the tax exemption for employer provided healthcare (he called it the 'third big entitlement') in favour of encouraging an individual market.

He was totally and consistently pro-life, all of his public career, and had actually signed laws that were anti-abortion (again, admittedly, in Utah). The one niggle is that he's always been a bit more pro-gay than the norm, I think he supported civil unions. But again I think that in terms of social conservatism the gay issue will move.

Add to that a realist foreign policy and he should've been the reformist conservative dream candidate.

Sadly he chose to run as a 'sane conservative' and ended up getting headlines by dissing his voters.

[derspiess]

and ended up getting headlines by dissing his voters.

This pretty much explains why Democrats and Berkut loved him.

[Razgovory]

Look at the tv ratings for her appearances, most of those shows are yesterday's news. There was no bump in ratings for her appearances. She is simply uninteresting, particularly to anyone under the age of 40.

If she is so uninteresting why must you convince people that is true.

I admit I'm not excited about her.  Of course, I wasn't excited by Obama.  I find him very dull.  Barring bad health or some bolt from the blue I think Hillary will take the nomination.  Don't know about the  general.  I have no idea who the Republicans will pick.  Chris Christie picks up the fat loudmouth demographic, which I believe is under represented in today politics.  Rand Paul picks up the crazy demographic.  Santorum picks up  the creepy religious guy demographic.

[Berkut]

and ended up getting headlines by dissing his voters.

This pretty much explains why Democrats and Berkut loved him.

No, I loved him long before he made the mistake of refusing to act like a Tea Party douchebag.

The irony of the resident Tea Partytards saying the problem with him was that he was a pussy and lacked courage is really quite amusing. If he was a pussy, he would have just gone with the herd of the ZOMG I CAN BE MORE RADICAL STOOPID RIGHT THAN YOU! like all the rest.

Like McCain, for example.

[garbon]

I have no idea who the Republicans will pick.  Chris Christie picks up the fat loudmouth demographic, which I believe is under represented in today politics.  Rand Paul picks up the crazy demographic.  Santorum picks up  the creepy religious guy demographic.

Yeah there doesn't even seem any good* Republican prospects.

*even just good if you are a Republican