Posted on 04/28/2014 9:39:19 AM PDT by PaulCruz2016
NEW YORK — The biggest parlor game on Wall Street and in corporate boardrooms these days is guessing whether former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush will run for president and save the GOP’s old establishment base from its rising populist wing.
The second most popular game is guessing what happens if Jeb says no.
Two dozen interviews about the 2016 race with unaligned GOP donors, financial executives and their Washington lobbyists turned up a consistent — and unusual — consolation candidate if Bush demurs, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie doesn’t recover politically and no other establishment favorite gets nominated: Hillary Clinton.
The darkest secret in the big money world of the Republican coastal elite is that the most palatable alternative to a nominee such as Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas or Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky would be Clinton, a familiar face on Wall Street following her tenure as a New York senator with relatively moderate views on taxation and financial regulation.
“If it turns out to be Jeb versus Hillary we would love that and either outcome would be fine,” one top Republican-leaning Wall Street lawyer said over lunch in midtown Manhattan last week. “We could live with either one. Jeb versus Joe Biden would also be fine. It’s Rand Paul or Ted Cruz versus someone like Elizabeth Warren that would be everybody’s worst nightmare.”
(Excerpt) Read more at dyn.politico.com ...
Doesn’t matter if Jeb says No.
Either way, we ain’t voting for him.
Not an inch of difference between him and the Rapist’s wife.
“..The second most popular game is guessing what happens if Jeb says no.”
::::::::::
Well, a Conservative Repub might run, and we might win!! As Repubs tend to do when running on a Conservative platform....funny how that works.
Um, Ben...it isnt a secret at all.
The Wall Street Whores speak and let us know which John they would prefer.
You know as screwed up the Occupy Wall Street protester were...they had their anger pointed in the right direction.
HA!!! I prefer to be T.P.'ed at D.C.
I can make money with the streets...I can't with the pol's.
Suicide by triangulation.
This is not a new phenomenon.
I wonder if either party is taking into account how boring and unimaginative these options are.
Agree w/ you there. All you need do is read the WSJ and see that they're all in on amnesty.
Plus they like the bailouts and the open spigot in DC.
What they don't like are crazy "radicals" that are going to threaten their fat gov contracts by thrying to reduce debt.
And there you have it folks! The Wall Street elite stacking the economic deck all while sacrificing any and all other issues dealing with morality.
(time for a new, conservative party)
I have no doubt the financial industry & the leadership of both parties want boring & unimaginative. Keeping things predictable is the best way to fleece the rest of us.
FINALLY someone said it. Been saying it and some of my family thinks I am nuts.
Hildabeast, if she runs, wins. Hands down. I don’t care if Bush gets the Nom, the PTB want her there and that’s the way it will be.
Has anybody wondered why the Dow, S & P and NASDAQ are at or near record highs with a left winger like Barry Soetoro in the Oval Office? Its because he knows enough to do Wall Street’s bidding.
The people with the money, power and influence to make the calls to get rid of Barry aren’t calling members of Congress and federal judges because they are making too much money.
> Ted Cruz versus someone like Elizabeth Warren that would be everybody’s worst nightmare.
IOW, Politico is back to its usual practice of not making any sense.
Rand Paul's immigration speech...The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration.[Posted on 03/19/2013 7:04:07 AM PDT by Perdogg]
Unfortunately, like many of the major debates in Washington, immigration has become a stalemate-where both sides are imprisoned by their own rhetoric or attachment to sacred cows that prevent the possibility of a balanced solution.
Immigration Reform will not occur until Conservative Republicans, like myself, become part of the solution. I am here today to begin that conversation.
Let's start that conversation by acknowledging we aren't going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants.
If you wish to work, if you wish to live and work in America, then we will find a place for you...
This is where prudence, compassion and thrift all point us toward the same goal: bringing these workers out of the shadows and into being taxpaying members of society.
Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers.12 million more people assimilating into society. 12 million more people being productive contributors.
Rand Paul calls on conservatives to embrace immigration reformLatinos, should be a natural constituency for the party, Paul argued, but "Republicans have pushed them away with harsh rhetoric over immigration." ...he would create a bipartisan panel to determine how many visas should be granted for workers already in the United States and those who might follow... [and the buried lead] "Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers...[Posted on 04/21/2013 1:52:42 PM PDT by SoConPubbie]
[but he's not in favor of amnesty, snicker, definition of is is]
Rand Paul: Time for GOP to soften war stance...by softening its edge on some volatile social issues and altering its image as the party always seemingly "eager to go to war... We do need to expand the party and grow the party and that does mean that we don't always all agree on every issue" ... the party needs to become more welcoming to individuals who disagree with basic Republican doctrine on emotional social issues such as gay marriage... "We're going to have to be a little hands off on some of these issues ... and get people into the party," Paul said.[Posted on 01/31/2013 5:08:50 PM PST by xzins]
Rand Paul On Shutdown: "Even Though It Appeared I Was Participating In It, It Was A Dumb Idea"I said throughout the whole battle that shutting down the government was a dumb idea. Even though it did appear as if I was participating in it, I said it was a dumb idea. And the reason I voted for it, though, is that it's a conundrum. Here's the conundrum. We have a $17 trillion debt and people at home tell me you can't give the president a blank check. We just can't keep raising the debt ceiling without conditions. So unconditionally raising the debt ceiling, nobody at home wants me to vote for that and I can't vote for that. But the conundrum is if I don't we do approach these deadlines. So there is an impasse. In 2011, though, we had this impasse and the president did negotiate. We got the sequester. If we were to extend the sequester from discretionary spending to all the entitlements we would actually fix our problem within a few years.[Posted on 11/19/2013 12:16:51 PM by Third Person]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.