Republican Realist? Who will beat Clinton?

[Mountain Man]

The closest thing I could find with google was this chart of the 2008 US presidential candidates:

According to that chart, Obama is a right-leaning centrist.

[nickcopernicus]

Jeb Bush has gone out of his way to antagonize his base. In the unlikely scenario in which he wins the primary he will lose the general election. Conservatives don't like him and moderates will be forced with the prospect of another Bush. As far as political dynasties go I'd much rather be a Clinton than a Bush going into a general election. The only thing Jeb has going for him is money, and money isn't enough. His corrupt party machine just can't raise as much money as the Democrats' corrupt party machines, especially with Hillary piloting a state of the art Crintonu MK-3 Mecha.

Nick:
I don’t know. I always got the feeling that conservatives liked Romney less than McCain (although they voted more for Romney. Maybe they just hated Obama more?) Essentially, I think Romney won the nomination mostly because of money. As the establishment candidate, I don’t see anyone besides maybe Walker seriously challenging him. Maybe Christi (he appears to be down on the ropes now).

DE:
IMO Scott Walker has done a very good job of making himself not stand out at all, which is why I'd say he has the best chance to beat Hillary.

Nick:
Maybe. I think he’s too much of a social conservative for swing voters. He has been staying under the radar as of late. But some of his political mishaps,
specifically his Romney-style flip-flop, don't bode well for the future.

Source: Politico

Instead, after signing a bill with a provision that would likely have shuttered a Wisconsin abortion clinic had the courts not tossed it, Walker ran an ad where he declared “there’s no doubt in my mind the decision of whether or not to end a pregnancy is an agonizing one.” And he said the bill leaves the final decision on abortion “to a woman and her doctor.”

© Copyright Original Source

DE:
Rubio's flip flop on amnesty probably killed his political career (nobody but political wonks remember his SOTU response). He's like a Scott Walker without the teflon skin.

Nick:
I’d only add that Walker has different credentials; Walker has actual executive experience. On the surface, Rubio seems to be a more skilled politician. His work on immigration showed that he was at least willing to work with the other side.

DE:
Rand Paul picked the wrong side in the current ethnic wars. He's running for leadership of the White Party but stupidly backed the manufactured hands up don't shoot garbage which won't play well with his base. OTOH he did do a good job of handling abortion questions. I'd say he's the wild card in this election.

Nick:
Demonstrating that he doesn’t hate, or at least have a great contempt, for African Americans will actually win him some votes in the General Election. You’re correct that it probably won’t play well in places like Mississippi and Alabama.

DE:
You're a liberal pretending to be a centrist so you probably don't realize most people care even less about bridgegate than they do about benghazi. For me bridgegate would actually be a plus if it were true because I'd love to see a president playing cutthroat cloak and dagger politics behind the scene, Kennedy style. Christie won't win because he's loud and fat for himself rather than being loud and fat for others.

Nick:
What you see as liberal, most of the world sees as moderate, so I’ll just shrug my shoulders at that. If the federal investigations show him coming up clean, it will mostly be a non-issue. Real Clear Politics gives Clinton a 9.3% advantage over Christi. Given the already narrow window that Republicans have, I think he’d likely lose worse than Romney.

DE:
From your lips to God's ears. The Republican Party hates its core base so hopefully they will never have full power again. Conservatives should aim for as much deadlock as humanly possible and start surgically hijacking back their party in the interim.

Nick:
I don’t think political deadlock will work as good as you think it will.

DE:
One thing I'd caution about though is taking trends for granted in the long term, like some of the light thinkers here do. Germany did a 180 from decadent liberal Weimar to pseudo-conservative head hunting Nazi in a very short amount of time. My guess is that Millenials will be the last progressive generation before a radical political shift.

Nick:
Yes. Stuff like 9/11 can radically change things. It would be idiotic to completely count Conservatives out in nationwide offices; however barring radical change in geopolitics, I think they’re going to wind up having to move to the left.
Just look at the trend Homosexual rights have taken in last 20 years.

Cheers,

Nick

[nickcopernicus]

I think in 2008, everyone kind of initially just assumed that Hillary would win, because she had the name-recognition. And then Obama appeared, relatively out of nowhere, and went on to win. What makes you think that history won't repeat itself?

Nick:
the difference this time is that AFAICT, there aren't any serious challengers to her. She's not ahead this time only because of name recognition. And even if he he may have been full of crap, Obama ran a brilliant campaign; both in 2008 and 2012. I don't see anyone in either the Democrat or Republican field that appears capable of pulling off a similar campaign. Except for Bush, maybe.

[nickcopernicus]

You don't think she might have too many political skeletons in her closet?
(and I think Jeb Bush has probably inherited just as many)

Nick:
The main reason she doesn't have to worry about Skeletons in her closet is because she has pretty much been vetted by the media and politicians for the better part of the last 25 years. It doesn't seem likely that we're going to "discover" some shocking issue that de-rails her campaign. sure, we have stuff like Benghazi, but no one outside of the Republican voters really care about that stuff. I can't believe someone would be like "Hey, I think I'll vote for Clinton...What!!!????? She used her personal e-mail instead? Screw that, I'll vote for Bush."

[Paprika]

What you see as liberal, most of the world sees as moderate

Projection much? 5.5 billion (~78%) of the world's population resides in in non-liberal Asia and Africa alone.

[nickcopernicus]

Projection much? 5.5 billion (~78%) of the world's population resides in in non-liberal Asia and Africa alone.

Nick:
You're correct. What I should have said was most of the developed world is to the far left of the US.

[Bill the Cat]

Nick:
You're correct. What I should have said was most of the developed world is to the far left of the US.

No accounting for taste...

[Raphael]

Nick:
What you see as liberal, most of the world sees as moderate, so I’ll just shrug my shoulders at that. If the federal investigations show him coming up clean, it will mostly be a non-issue. Real Clear Politics gives Clinton a 9.3% advantage over Christi. Given the already narrow window that Republicans have, I think he’d likely lose worse than Romney.

Indeed. In my Country I am a Centre Right voter (yes Starlight, I voted for John Key, and looking at the options I don't see my vote shifting from National anytime soon). But by American standards that pretty liberal.

[pancreasman]

If MountainMan is correct in his theory that Republicans can't win by being moderate because they lose their base, then there is no way a Republican can win at all. The 'base' he speaks of alienates large sections of the electorate.

[Starlight]

Indeed. In my Country I am a Centre Right voter (yes Starlight, I voted for John Key, and looking at the options I don't see my vote shifting from National anytime soon). But by American standards that pretty liberal.

I'm not totally convinced that National is actually that liberal by US standards. (Or to put it another way, I think many people who vote National don't really realize how right-wing many of National's current policies actually are) The political compass people situate National pretty squarely in the middle of the area that the US republicans occupy:

(Pointing out that I vote Green will probably surprise no one. The Mana party does not properly exist anymore, so its presence in the above graphic is somewhat illusory and wrongly gives the impression of choice within the bottom-left quadrant.)

Now, I do see a case for arguing that the political compass people got it wrong and that the entire US spectrum is further right than the entire NZ spectrum, because on certain issues it clearly is. (And I see a good case for nit-picking their placements of Conservatives, National, and Act relative to one another) But overall, there's quite a large number of policy similarities between the Nats and the Republicans, so I'm inclined to think their placement is mostly correct.

According to that chart, Obama is a right-leaning centrist.

Yes. I think that chart is correct in that regard. It certainly took me by surprise how far to the right Obama turned out to be in his policies subsequent to election, given he'd been touted as a relatively progressive candidate.

[Yttrium]

I wonder where Ted Cruz shows up on that chart. He seems to be the most extreme conservative of the Republican pack for this election.

[Starlight]

I wonder where Ted Cruz shows up on that chart. He seems to be the most extreme conservative of the Republican pack for this election.

Here's a chart I've previously come across that answers that question:

(from here)

Although, while looking for that chart, I also found this one, which looks interesting too:

(from here)

[Yttrium]

Here's a chart I've previously come across that answers that question:

Thanks! That's very interesting. I didn't realize that Scott Walker was so conservative.

Looking at those charts, I'd have to assume that Christie can't get nominated, and Jeb Bush would have problems too. Santorum is more moderate than Romney? Huh.

[Raphael]

Please excuse the somewhat brief and maybe terse typo-laden responses, I am typing one handed as I had surgery on my right wrist last Wednesday and am still in plaster.

I'm not totally convinced that National is actually that liberal by US standards. (Or to put it another way, I think many people who vote National don't really realize how right-wing many of National's current policies actually are) The political compass people situate National pretty squarely in the middle of the area that the US republicans occupy:

I seriously question the accuracy of that chart as I would not put definately not NZ First further left than NZ Labour(especially as under Cunliffe NZL shunted further left in an attempt to regain votes lost to the Greens).

I would also put the greens as being more authoritarian as they are wanting to bring in increasing restrictions and laws about what we can and can't do (more so than ACT which is wanting to reduce the laws governing what we can and can't do.

I view United Future as being pretty much in the middle (which is why Dunne can work with either major party).

(Pointing out that I vote Green will probably surprise no one. The Mana party does not properly exist anymore, so its presence in the above graphic is somewhat illusory and wrongly gives the impression of choice within the bottom-left quadrant.)

Not surprised in the least. I am interested in who you think should replace Russel Norman.

Now, I do see a case for arguing that the political compass people got it wrong and that the entire US spectrum is further right than the entire NZ spectrum, because on certain issues it clearly is. (And I see a good case for nit-picking their placements of Conservatives, National, and Act relative to one another) But overall, there's quite a large number of policy similarities between the Nats and the Republicans, so I'm inclined to think their placement is mostly correct.

And yet under John Key, National has implemented and/or voted for policies that would result in a Republican politician being crucified by the American right.
I think they have it wrong

Yes. I think that chart is correct in that regard. It certainly took me by surprise how far to the right Obama turned out to be in his policies subsequent to election, given he'd been touted as a relatively progressive candidate.

Ummmm, yeah I'll agree to disagree

[Raphael]

btw bowing out of the conversation for the rest of the day as I am hunting for pain killers and lunch, and then really need to catch up work.