Republicans have a new favorite for 2016 (the Establishment does, we don't)

dailycaller.com ^ | 1/29/14 | Alexis Levinson

[Shery]

As if very many conservatives voted in the PPP poll. This means absolutely NADA!

[Cyber Liberty]

Yes, it was. But he was tossed aside in ‘76 because it was not his turn yet. I figured going back over 30 years was sufficient. No, huh? It was Ike’s turn once, but I wasn’t borned yet. :^)

[CowboyJay]

The DNC would be licking their chops if Huckabee gets the nomination. Hillary would serve his head up on a platter. I doubt he’d carry a single state outside the South.

But it’ll never happen. The establishment will use him as a stalking horse again. And I’m pretty sure he’s in on the joke.

[sickoflibs]

Huck the favorite? Figures.

Over this Huck ‘uncle sugar’ and ‘woman’s libido’ nonsense I was on thread after thread posting that I have ZERO sympathy for him.

In fact I argued that Huck pulled this nonsense simply to create a smoke screen to divert from him standing behind Grahamnesty.

Well it looked liked it worked with some.

Say something stupid to get the libs to go after you, then cry victim and suddenly you are a hero with the drones.
A Huck scam.

Well I don’t respond to the dog whistle.

You can see how McCain and Romney got the nominations.

[fieldmarshaldj]

I’ve stated many times I don’t like Huckster. I think he was a lousy Governor and he left the AR GOP in the worst state it had been in in 4 decades when he left office in 2007. Saying that, regarding the speech he made, there was nothing in it that he said that was wrong. It was deliberately and willfully misrepresented by the media, just like anything and everything ever said by a Republican (Conservative or RINO). I’m still not going to support him for any office.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”Saying that, regarding the speech he made, there was nothing in it that he said that was wrong. It was deliberately and willfully misrepresented by the media,..”

I saw the full clip a few times and it phrased very carelessly which gave them the opportunity.

I could easily write a script to get to the same point that wouldn't be so easy for them to do that to.

Many shows on MSNBC were playing the entire clip including the part where he says ‘Democrats think that.....’ and it was still an easy target\.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Nobody sane gives a $hit what runs on MSNBC. If I had a speech being ripped apart by that whiter-than-white Stalinist propagandist channel, I’d wear it like a badge of honor.

Anyway, no skin off my nose. If he wants to insult rodents and teevee network nervous hospital patients, that’s fine. I’m still never going to vote for Huckster.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”Nobody sane gives a $hit what runs on MSNBC. If I had a speech being ripped apart by that whiter-than-white Stalinist propagandist channel, I’d wear it like a badge of honor.”

Huck must of, he got on Kelly show and tried to claim that his comment had NOTHING to do with birth control or women.

My point was the GOP talking points over at FNC are claiming Dems are not playing the full seg in context, but they are.

[yongin]

you fault t-paw and huckabee for failing to grow the gop during their time as governor. well, the fl gop experienced great growth under jeb. therefore. should jeb deserve consideration as the smart bush?

[fieldmarshaldj]

On those grounds, he could. But I would not support him for President.

[dalereed]

No damn way!

[Impy]

I’d give T-Paw a break being in MN, which has been trending GOP but is still tough, that the GOP got blasted there in 2006 and 2008 is not something I think you could blame him for, in national rat landslide years the low hanging fruit is gonna fall. Huck had no excuse coming from an increasingly conservative southern state for the embarrassingly pitiful condition of Arkansas Republicans.

As for Jeb, if Lawton Chiles hadn’t convinced senile voters that Jeb would somehow steal their social security he’d have won in 94 and almost certainly been President instead of George and probably would done at least slightly better (would be hard not to).

I’ll give him his props for running the Florida GOP well but he’s still a shamnesty supporting neocon who wouldn’t make a very good President.

A Bush is the absolute last person to consider for 2016. Even if the Bush name wasn’t mud, the monarchy thing, I know Dowager Queen Hilly is running but could you imagine the last THREE Republican Presidents being a New England bred RINO and his 2 sons? That’s insane.

As Auho2republican has said if his name was Jeb Smith he’d have been the nominee in either 2008 or 2012. Too bad for him it’s not.

[BillyBoy]

>>> Bush 1988: It was his turn.
Bush 1992: It was his turn. He was the incumbent. He lost.
Dole 1996: It was his turn. He lost.
Bush 2000: He bucked McCain, who’s turn it was. He won.
Bush 2004: It was his turn. He was the incumbent. He won.
McCain 2008: It was his turn. He lost.
Romney 2012: It was his turn. He lost.
I see a pattern here. When a Pubbie gets the nomination who bucks the “turn,” he wins. <<

I actually think this pattern is likely to be broken in 2016. The person who could claim it was their "turn" by virtue of being "runner up" from 2012 is either Santorum or Newt (who came in a distance third but his supporters like to pretend he was "last conservative standing" because everyone else besides him realized Romney had gotten an insurmountable lead)

Another "tradition" that was broken in the most recent presidential primary was the idea that "the road to the nomination leads through South Carolina". We were reminded over and over again that every Republican nominee since Reagan in 1980 had won South Carolina before winning nationally, and that nobody had gotten the GOP nomination without taking that primary.

Newt took it in the 2012, but this time the road through South Carolina took him to Georgia and nowhere else.

I not only think Santorum and Gingrich would have a difficult time getting the nomination in 2016, I can't imagine the GOP establishment would throw their weight behind either of them. Santorum is way too much of a socially conservative firebrand for them, and Newt is... Newt.

[Impy]

Yeah that stupid “tradition” (that hasn’t benefited us since 1980) of giving it the runner up or other top contender from last time is sure to end. No one who ran in 2012 or 2008 is likely to succeed including fat *** Huckabee.

I was for Santorum, by default, but don’t want to see him run again. Half of FR would probably jump right on the Newt train, gag.

Any other retreads, there’s always Governor Hair (Perry), after his poor campaigning and implosion, I don’t think so.

There is Rand Paul, surrogate for Ron who competed the last 2 times. No one in the establishment would ever consider it Ron Paul’s “turn” though. Ha.

[BillyBoy]

It's funny, the "freeper choice" for President has always surprised me, and I always ended up in the losing minority who is against that choice (though obviously I'm still here because I never belonged to any the RINO kool-aid drinkers pushing for Giuliani in 2008 or Romney in 2012)

Fieldmarshaldj was constantly ringing the alarms about Romney in '08 and I told him he was wasting his time and preaching to the choir. Romney is a RINO from Mass. and there was no way freepers would rally around him. Then, to my shock and horror, freepers did exactly that after Fred Thompson dropped out, and somehow Romney was the "true conservative" left, even though Mitt "better for gay rights than Ted Kennedy" had traditionally had a career to the LEFT of both Huckabee and McCain before he reinvented himself as a conservative in 2008. No way was I supporting a guy in the primary who had become "conservative" a few months earlier. Unfortunately, most freepers did. Ironically, so did Rick Santorum (endorsed Romney over Huckabee and McCain), and I'd be willing to bet 90% of the freepers bashing him for doing so made the same decision in 2008. Sheer hypocrisy.

In 2012, I figured NO WAY would FR EVER rally around Newt. He was polling around 2% and had been the subject of ridicule here for years, and he was loathed by freepers a year before the primary because of global warming ad with Nancy and the Dede Scozzafava idiocy. Then suddenly, they decide this guy is the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan and I'm in the embarrassing position of being on the other side, and considering Newt an even worse choice than Romney! That was hell for a couple of months while freepers were drinking the Newt kool-aid. And after a while, it was completely pointless. He had won two states so the only possible reason to continue backing Newt was to stroke his own ego.

So who knows what will happen in 2016? Maybe they'll decide they love Peter King AGAIN and proclaim he's the New York version of Ronald Reagan. Stranger things have happened. He's name is mud as of this moment, and everyone (finally) acknowledges he's a backstabbing RINO (which I had been saying since he worked his butt off to save Clinton in '98), but I've seen King convince some gullible GOP voters he's their savior for seven straight elections now, because he's a "Straight shooter" who goes on the nightly conservative talk shows and beats his chest about how pro-life and anti-illegal alien he is.

Hopefully most of FR is on the same side as me in 2016, but after the love shown for Romney, Trump Perry, Gingrich, etc., I'm not very hopeful.

[yongin]

remember, newt called paul ryan's budget plan, 'right wing social engineering' in early 2Θ11. the base cried foul at newt. newt took a trip to greece. newt's staff dumped him for rick perry. pundits predicted newt to drop by the iowa straw poll. but newt carried on and outlasted perry. those same staffers that dumped newt, came crawling back to him after perry flopped. jack kingston was one of the few elected official that stood by newt, good and bad. should jack kingston be rewarded with a senate seat for his loyalty to newt?

[Impy]

Newt stinks like spoiled milk.

I’m for Karen Handel in GA. Broun is a Paulbot who could blow the GE. Kingston is very establishment. Gingery is elderly.