tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post6976219917948138903..comments2023-10-16T07:13:12.123-05:00Comments on A plain blog about politics: Counting Backwards (I Count You In)Jonathan Bernsteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-14606839898203520052013-10-09T22:07:35.129-05:002013-10-09T22:07:35.129-05:00And if you were wondering whether anyone would get...And if you were wondering whether anyone would get a Throwing Muses reference: yes. TNnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-5369067949281583662013-10-09T16:57:46.816-05:002013-10-09T16:57:46.816-05:00I think Norquist underestimates just how delusiona...I think Norquist underestimates just how delusional world-historical figure Newt Gingrich can be.TNnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-83384192007704865212013-10-09T15:03:02.782-05:002013-10-09T15:03:02.782-05:00I don't understand what the evidence is for th...I don't understand what the evidence is for this assertion: "On the other hand, what may be happening on the Republican side is that the invisible primary is winnowing far more efficiently than it used to." The last robust evidence we have of this process is 2012. Is that the "it used to" in this sentence? I just don't see why anyone would make any conclusion about the composition of the 2016 field in 2013. Other than that, the safest thing we can say is that the evidence is that the Republican nomination process is defective or we just don't know. Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18440356770947146690noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-58113976172391053782013-10-09T14:52:35.492-05:002013-10-09T14:52:35.492-05:00I wouldn't read too much into the 2012 Republi...I wouldn't read too much into the 2012 Republican race and the lack of "serious" Presidential candidates. I think it's not part of a long-term trend, but rather a result of three related factors:<br /><br />1) The 2006 and 2008 elections wiped out a lot of potential Republican Presidential candidates with conventional credentials<br />2) The Republican party's policy positions changed so much that many potential candidates were left with policy stances that did not fit the party's priorities<br />3) The class of 2010 was too young to jump into the Presidential contest<br /><br />Combine those factors, and all you're left with are Republicans who could weather the Democratic tsunami of 06 and 08 (Perry), left office in the nick of time (Pawlenty), or had no qualms about shifting their long-held beliefs to fit the new party (Romney).<br /><br />I bet the 2016 field will be even bigger for the Republicans since they have a larger bench to draw from, thanks to their big 2010 wins.<br /><br />As for the Democrats, they will probably have a 2000-like contest if Clinton runs, where she is the clear favorite and is against one or two real opponents who are still far outclassed, like O'Malley. There are many Democrats who will sit out 2016 if Clinton runs, such as Gillibrand, Cuomo, and (perhaps) Biden. (Which, as you say, doesn't mean they're not "running" now. Rather, they would "drop out" the day Clinton announces.)Kalhttps://twitter.com/kalbelgarionnoreply@blogger.com