Here's a fun little question to keep you busy until we get the polling thread up. Which living person, apart from John McCain and Barack Obama, is most likely to eventually become President of the United States? Is Sarah Palin third in this line of pseudo-succession?
9.04.2008
The Next Next President
@ 2:28 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
212 comments
No "none of the above" option? Boo.
Can I pick the field?
Nate do you think you could tweak the site so we don't have to jump to the comment form after 200? The traffic is picking up and your posts slow overnight and it's a pain for those of us who just want to read the comments to have to bring up the comments box that can't be refreshed.
Basically you're asking who the 45th president will be.
I'd say Sarah Palin, if elected VP, will instantly become Hillary's biggest rival for the job.
Because of that, I suspect Hillary will transition from tepid, cosmetic support for Obama to genuine, vigorous support.
Hillary Clinton. She has an excellent chance of becoming president in 2012 if Obama loses, and still has a decent chance of becoming President in 2016 if he wins
Joe Biden, I fear.
Nothing against Joe, of course.
12 years of Democratic presidents? It's just not likely at all.
Hillary Clinton. She has an excellent chance of becoming president in 2012 if Obama loses
If Obama loses, Palin is surely more likely to become the 45th than Clinton, either in 2012 or before.
shawkin--
Should I interpret that comment in the most pessimistic possible way?
I voted for Schweitzer, for the record. He was the one of all those picks whose speech this year seemed not only energizing, but positive and inspirational. If Obama wins and does well, that'll be a good thing. If McCain wins, we'll need all the positivity and inspiration we can get.
I think Clinton is the obvious pick. During the primaries I hated her guts, but after 8 years of Obama I think that Washington will be in a different climate and we can afford to have her in office. She'd be a forceful leader, and with the Palin selection I think it's important that the first woman president be someone supremely qualified, and of course the democrats deserve the first female president because they are the ones who have fought so hard for women's rights.
I'm a green party member, and I'd probably vote Nader if she ran, though.
You forgot Nancy Pelosi... Speaker of the House is 3rd in line to the Presidency.
Of the people on the list Palin.
I went for Jindal: what possessed me?!
MCCAIN PALIN 2008!
RED AMERICA HERE WE COME!
I'm really confused. Why isn't *my* name up there. I'm a PTA mom with a background in sports. I come from the reddest state of them all and I really am a sexy librarian.
Prematurely Grey 2012!
(It'll be a PG campaign, I promise... And my daughters will be just old enough to be SIMULTANEOUSLY pregnant!)
How about puttin' Putin on the list.
And I don't mean Sarah Putin.
The answer to your posed question seems pretty obvious to me - Dick Cheney. And I hate the guy.
The only path to the presidency for Palin is if McCain is elected in 2008 but is somehow incapacitated during his first term. Given the economic outlook, whoever is elected in 2008 will not be reelected in 2012, IMHO. So if Obama is elected in 2008, my money is on whoever the GOP put out there (and I doubt it would be Palin). If Obama loses in 2008, Clinton will almost certainly be the Democratic nominee and 2012 and the overwhelming favorite running against whoever the standard bearer for a very much beleaguered GOP (regardless of whether McCain or Palin is the nominee).
I say Hillary. I expect Obama to be elected twice. Biden will not run for President in 2016 due to his age, and Hillary will win the presidency and continue Obama's progressive agenda.
Well, I hope we win 3 elections in a row for the first time since FDR. Is that too optomistic?
You forgot Nancy Pelosi... Speaker of the House is 3rd in line to the Presidency.
Her chances of preceding Biden and Palin is very low.
2008central,
Dick Cheney would never emerge from the shadows to run his own campaign. He's got plenty of power and influence as is, and he doesn't exactly love public scrutiny.
Biden will be too old & booring (sorry mate. You are a safe pair of hands but not enough charisma) , Palin too scandle ridden. Hillary has a chance but the Super Delegates will not side with her in advance like last time.
It will be somebody new.
How about Nate Silvermann?
Maybe you need to have separate polls. Which of these people are most likely to be ELECTED president (Hillary, Mitt, etc.), and which of these people are most likely to BECOME president (Palin, Biden, Cheney, Pelosi, etc.)
If McCain has a 50% chance of winning, and a 20% chance of dying in office, that makes Palin's chances 10%. I think that's higher than any of the other choices, just on the strength of succession alone.
The comments box can be refreshed, left click on it.
Can we say who we want to be pres least- Jindal and Palin scare me, I hate conservatives in my bedroom - even though I am an old white guy and nothing ever happens there.
Hillary won't even win the Democratic nomination in 2012 if Obama loses.
She might win in 2016 if he wins though.
Her political fate is closely tied to Obama's.
I'm a green party member, and I'd probably vote Nader if she ran, though.
What the heck does the random scribbling you would put on your personal ballot have anything to do with anything?
I think Hillary's chances are greater than 10%.
the tag says 2012.
i believe Obama will be president until 2016, at which time the republicans will pit him up against a Jindal-Palin ticket, unless Obama has an ineffective first term (and you better believe the GOP will try to make that happen). They're saving Jindal for a time they're sure he'll win. One loss and the brand is ruined - that's why he's not on McCain's ticket.
Maybe you need to have separate polls.
You're kind of missing the point of the game.
I'd vote for Lize - But only if not just her daughter were pregnant out of wed lock - but so too was she, and she agreed to try and ban Huck Finn and those nasty ant- Christian Harry Potter books, and ban birth control, and sex ed, evolution, and outlaw homosexuality.
Can you do that Lize?
The way things have gone this year, I'd have to guess that the 2012 GOP nominee is currently still being assembled in the lab in Karl Rove's basement.
Should've split this by party. Currently 16% of your readers think a Republican has a chance of being the "next next" President. If there was ever any doubt about party identification here...
And here I thought this was going to be a convenient segue into how worried we should be that Palin is very likely to be the "next next" President.
VOTE FOR CHANGE
REGISTER TO VOTE AND FIND YOUR POLLING LOCATION
OBAMA/BIDEN 08
THE WINNING TEAM
WE JUST CAN'T AFFORD MORE OF THE SAME
https://voteforchange.com/
https://voteforchange.com/
https://voteforchange.com/
https://voteforchange.com/
https://voteforchange.com/
There's no obvious favorite, but I'm picking Nancy Pelosi as #44 - for 2 weeks in January after Bush & Cheney flee prosecution.
Schweitzer is my second choice. He can draw from red and blue states, a real trick in the Rovian political hatefest.
Schweitzer is my second choice. He can draw from red and blue states, a real trick in the Rovian political hatefest.
Where's Huckabee? I'm afraid that he might be more likely than any of those listed.
jqb said...
What the heck does the random scribbling you would put on your personal ballot have anything to do with anything?
I'm sorry if the joke went over your head. It involved Nader still running in 2016.
One of the few areas where Republicans can claim advantage over Democrats I think. Assuming Obama wins this year, you can forget Biden and Hillary. Too old by 2016. But no matter whether Obama or McCain win, Palin, Romney, Jindal, Crist will be available in 2012 or 2016.
Hillary has a shot in 2012, but only if McCain is elected, obviously.
I'm with Liz! Well, why not me?
My son is a senior in highschool now, but I was involved in PTA for the longest. Organizational skills: You bet! My son is an Eagle Scout, and I'm a Scout mom. I had my son and wasn't married. I know lot's of people. A perfect candidate, lol.
I'm more impressed with the total number of votes so far than the results.
I wonder if traffic to this site has already eclipsed that at baseballprospectus.com
I went for Schweitzer. But actually I think the next next president will be Obama in a landslide in 2012
Bobby Jindal. He's a rising star who is putting together a very strong conservative record. He's thirty seven years old. The window in which he can viably run for President is over two decades long, so he could reasonably wait for a cycle where the GOP is advantaged.
I think, out of all the people there, Jindal's is the only one that can be accurately measured at this point. Palin, Biden, and Hillary's chances all depend on the outcome of this election. Jindal is the only one who will have a huge chance no matter what happens in this presidential election cycle. Or, for that matter, the next two.
Hey Nate,
Can we add comment rating to the forum with a negative threshold? Its pretty obvious we're getting a lot of chaff in here.
Aaron said...
Bobby Jindal. He's a rising star who is putting together a very strong conservative record. He's thirty seven years old. The window in which he can viably run for President is over two decades long, so he could reasonably wait for a cycle where the GOP is advantaged.
I think, out of all the people there, Jindal's is the only one that can be accurately measured at this point. Palin, Biden, and Hillary's chances all depend on the outcome of this election. Jindal is the only one who will have a huge chance no matter what happens in this presidential election cycle. Or, for that matter, the next two.
Yeah, you're right! White House Exorcisms all around!
If the economy tanks, I bet Hillary gives Obama a primary battle in 2012. You heard it here first!
Hillary first, party second, country third - the clinton rules.
Why not Jim Webb?
I think we're at a fundamental shift in the electorate. I think Obama knocks down our debt in the first four years, then ends up with a surplus in the next four and 72-year-old Hillary follows him into office in 2012.
Not that I would vote for her though. Ugh. But I don't see a good moderate Republican who will keep the surplus in the budget coming on the horizon.
Elected--None of the above.
The odds of McCain dying in office are high, but his odds of getting elected are low. Give an odds edge to Biden if Obama dies in office.
After 2 terms of Obama, none of these candidates will be viable other than perhaps Biden if he distinguishes himself as VP.
So, adding the numbers...I vote Warner.
I'd have to say Schweitzer. He's sharp, positive and governs blood red Montana.
I'd bet he'd lock in the West for a generation.
Jim Webb dropped out of the vetting for VP this year - that worries me. Does he have skeletons?
I'm a first time poster, so first I want to say this websites great and I love what you do with it. But I think that if Obama wins in this election, there is a legitimate possibility that something will happen to him in office, something I sincerely hope will not happen, but, given that McCain does not have the same chances of winning as Obama, and Obama still has a reasonable risk of dieing in office from assassination, I think Biden may still be a likely choice.
Oops--I meant that she will follow him in 2016, not 2012.
Further to jqb's comment - If Obama loses then Palin is likely to be president in 2010!
@dpldust
If elected, I promise not only to ban the books, birth control, sex ed, and homosexuality, I will outlaw reading entirely. As for evolution, well, it's over. Once I'm elected, it's devolution all the way, baby.
But let me just say, if it's me v. Rhonda, pick Rhonda. She wasn't married when she had her son. Clearly, she is far more qualified than I am.
Polls seems self-selected toward lefties (myslef included), but really I wanted to vote "none of the above". Just don't see it, Hill will be too old, but that's most likely of the list I see.
I REALLY like Schweitzer for the Dems.
Here's a curveball for the Republicans: Paul Ryan (WI).
In 8 years he will be 46 and a leading authority of fiscal conservatism.
Aaaaaron articulated what I felt instinctvely. Nice work.
coda: how many of you experts picked obama 4 years ago?
I'd have to say Palin, but only if she gets her middle daughter knocked up by then.
@ will walker
I'm sorry if my goofing around bothered you. I was one of the people who begged Nate to get rid of anonymous posting, so I understand your plea for more order.
I guess I don't take internal 538 polls quite as seriously as the external ones. Needed to blow off some serious steam. Palin's getting to me. Thanks for understanding.
I went Schweitzer. Assuming Obama wins, Palin will never get the nominationagain (or if she does, they'll lose in a landslide).
There is definite space there for a fiscal conservative though. Just not a religious nutter.
Did Webb get dropped from the selection list because he was too inexperienced as governor? ha ha ha....
I wonder if a moose impregnated her, whether they would keep the babby.
I wasn't aware this poll was meant for value judgments, Jeff. Excuse me for assuming we were just dealing with data and theories. I won't make such a silly mistake again.
A few of you should re-read the poll question. The poll is asking about who you think is "most likely" to become president, not who you think is most likely to be president in 2012. Big difference, since then age begins to really matter, since it effects the number of cycles they're viable for. Warner is more likely than Hillary. He has 3+ cycles of decent viability, she has one. 2012 or 2016. And it's predicated on a good performance in this cycle. Her chances aren't as good as anyone would think.
I think Palin's brand of social conservatism is only going to get more out of vogue as time marches on, especially if it marches on under Obama. I'd say Hillary, but I'm not sure how well she'll hold up by 2016. So I'm saying Schweitzer.
I think the actual answer maybe none of the above. I mean would George W Bush's name have been on that list in 1992? Hadn't even been elected Governor then. But if I had to chose, although it does depend on the result of 2008 election
Here is my thinking- if Obama wins, then he will be re-elected in 2016. In 2016 of the list, my guess is Palin would get nominated and a female vote would get her elected in the end. (Though actually I am not sure personally). Clinton and Biden would be too old to run in 2016 (Hillary would be 69 in 2016, Biden 74) An outside bet for Democratic nominnee in 2016 could be Beau Biden though.
If the Democratic Party and Barack Obama do a decent job, the GOP might have to find a more centrist candidate, rather than a far right candidate as I think Palin would be.
If McCain wins
Hillary gets Dem nomination in 2012. Much depends on how McCain is perceived as President. But if people are even more tired of GOP government by 2012, expect the Dem nominee to win. If not and we go on to 2016 with GOP govts I would bet a 'none of the above' Democrat who we haven't heard of yet (maybe Beau Biden?) gets elected.
will walker -
We'd all like to block out the trolls, but given the strong partisan identification here it's very likely that any kind of comment rating system would be abused to hide opposing viewpoints.
Just try reading the politics sections of reddit or digg.
Christopher said...
I REALLY like Schweitzer for the Dems.
Here's a curveball for the Republicans: Paul Ryan (WI).
In 8 years he will be 46 and a leading authority of fiscal conservatism.
---------------------------Thanks for the tip. By 2012 any connections to Jack Ryan should be displaced.
Maybe Pres. Palins surprise choice in 2012?
Does Intrade or any other "house" have contracts/bets on MCain passing due to natural causes while in office?
The above would be an interesting side bet.
2012 will either be Obama vs Romney or Romney vs Clinton.
I don't see Sarah Palin having much of a political future.
The only way Clinton ever gets elected is if Obama loses this year. If he wins this year, he'll get token Dem opposition in 2012. By 2016, she's too old to run, so the nod will go to Shweitzer.
For the Dems...
How about Reps. Wexler or Wasserman from down here in Florida?
Anyone know why MSM has not picked up story of Palin being pregnant when she eloped? Seriously. Pro-Lifers will love that she kept the kid, but the rest of the nation will begin to think about birth control, AIDS and their children and their lives.
Most of us were damn lucky to get to the alter when we wanted rather than as a result of pregnancy. Life is hard, marriage is harder -outlawing sex ed and birth control and criminalizing abortion, even in the case of rape or incest - will make even the Cleveland, Catholic, Soccer Moms cringe. Trust me, even they don't all use the "method."
UNWANTED PREGNANCIES ARE NOT LIFE THREATENING - BUT IT MEANS THESE PEOPLE FOOLISHLY ENGAGED IN BEHAVIOUR THAT COULD HAVE BEEN. AIDS STILL KILLS. NOT TEACHING A TEEN HOW TO USE A CONDOM IS NEGLECTFUL AT BEST.
The lack of attention paid to the reckless behaviour of Palin and her daughter is frightning. Not one TV or radio station - Not MSNBC, NOT NPR said one damn word about HIV, Sphyillis or Ghonerea (sp?), as if the question was unwanted pregnancy. That is not the question - The question is what are the consequences of unprotected intercourse, and why does Palin object to teaching teenagers about birth control and protection?
Well obviously it's Sarah Palin right? She's the best politician I've ever seen. Check out her speech last night, which almost everybody who heard it admits that it was in some way brilliant. In a 35 minute address to the nation, she gave an incredible introduction to herself and her politics, right? Here are some things however that Sarah Palin didn't mention in her speech (perhaps she ran out of time):
1. Her position on healthcare
2. Her Position on the housing/mortgage crisis
3. Her Position on Iraq.
4. Her Position on Afghanistan/Bin Laden/war on terror
5. Her Position on any social issues like abortion or gay marriage.
6. Her position on the budget deficit, trade or the weakness of the dollar.
7. Her position on Social Security.
8. Her position on unemployment or job creation.
9. Her position on immigration
I guess when Rick Davis says that this campaign isn't really about issues, he really meant it.
Here are some things she did mention:
John McCain was a POW
Small town mayors have responsibilities - but then didn't list any
The state of Alaska has a huge surplus (thanks to oil and gas prices going through the roof). Suck on that Lower 48!
She sold a plane on Ebay.
Her husband is a champion snowmobile racer.
MEDIA BAD!
Of course that's the same media that's hawking the above described pile of absolute nothing as a great political speech.
As aaron said, it's about likelihood. That's why, in spite of my mistrust of Jindal, I think he's the most likely. Given how old McCain is now, Jindal has at least eight chances to run. I'm looking forward to seeing him up against Bristol Palin in the primaries and Chelsea Clinton the general.
HOW many votes for Schweitzer? How many times did Sean vote?
I picked Sarah Palin, simply because McCain has a good chance of winning...then a very good chance of dieing.
If Obama is elected, unless the economy is humming along at a 1999 level boom and Osama bin Laden is dead or in prison, expect a strong challenge from Jindal in 2012.
If McCain wins, he serves one term or loses very badly to Schweitzer.
You guys gotta admit Jindal did well this week.
Palin can't win a general, neither can Huckabee. The country still does have a majority who kind like that separation of church and state thing.
Jindal will still be very young in 2012, I think he waits for 2016 when he will not be against an incumbent (presuming, of course, BO holds on).
I went with Clinton. She'll only be 68 in 2016 and if she campaigns hard for Obama (along with her great speech at the DNC) I think the wounds opened up in the primary will be healed by '16. Biden will be too old to run in '16.
But that being said, definitely a hard decision. I think the only way Palin would get in is if McCain can win this year and she gets in by McCain not finishing his 4 years. She won't win on her own, that's for sure.
"You guys gotta admit Jindal did well this week."
Lowering the bar already hmm? LOL.
Yo, Nate,
Can you add the recent state polls in this afternoon?
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/4/105035/7201/602/586217
Obama's got big leads in IA, MN and NM now. And according to a new poll even leads ND by 3:
http://www.dakotapolitics.com/blogPost.asp?PostId=10915
JUST IN - Palin speach drew 37 million viewers.
John McCain, Putting Country Last since August 29th, 2008!
Jim Webb is not built for being VP. The same argument was used for James Baker III when they wanted him to be the "Leo McGarry" figure in 1988. (Enter Dan Quayle!)
Other than that, he's the guy Republicans cannot touch. AND he'll bring Appalachia into play, since he's one of them, blood flesh and bone.
I even see him carrying Southern states and doing well in TX.
If current identity insanity holds, his VP will have to be a minority vegan female or something, but Webb (as a public persona) is a strong hedge against said insanity.
By that time, some on the list will be too old like Hillary, faded into obscurity like Palin. And the whole GOP philosophy will have been discarded like Marxism, too.
That leaves Warner, or someone we don't know yet.
In 2016 the Clinton Presidency will be so far in history Hillary won't be able to run on that, plus she will be Ronald Reagan's age.
Hillary: 2016 to 2024
Not that unrealistic really. The republican party is destroying itself. They had a last chance until yesterday to withdraw Palin. It is gone.
Now the only chance was to say Obama is too inexperienced in 2008. That is over. In 2012 people have heard him from the white house -- they have seen him lead. In 2016 the most beloved Obama tells them to do one last thing for the "gipper". Vote for Hillary! We would have 60 percent of young people under 40 who have never voted for anyone but a democrat. They look at the main architect of the universal health care and easily defeat Miss congeniality.
2008 is 1932. Too many tea pot domes. Too much of miss managing the economy. We begin a 20 year long period for democratic rule.
I don't think Jindal would be a candidate in 2012 VC. If McCain lost I would bet that Romney, Palin or maybe Huckabee was the GOP candidate in 2012.
Does anyone else think that Palin is a bit hamstrung as Gov of Alaska in terms of running for Pres? Can she really spare the time to get ot Iowa and NH and other early states enough. Would she need to not be Governor before she ran?
Voice of reason -
Half cared for the content, the other half were rooting for a train wreck. She has alot of interest, her problem is alot of it is not a rooting interest.
If McCain wins, why bother with an election in 2012? At the rate voter suppression & court packing is moving, by then only white males over 60 will be allowed to vote, and their votes will be counted before they're cast by next generation machines.
Either that or he'll manage to start a nuclear war. Good odds, but I don't see a way to collect.
VC-
Jindal (and all of LA) got lucky. This was a CAT 2. For every category increase on the SS scale, there's about a five-fold increase in damage. Katrina came ashore as a Cat 3, and carried with it a CAT 4 storm surge. Remember... Most of the damage all across the coast from Katrina was flooding.
I just hope Mittens comes across this poll. Even Bobby Jindal is doubling him up!
37 million... incredible.
Some tough questions unrelated to the next POTUS after McCain or Obama.
Obama will be on live tonight on the 'O'Reilly Factor' at 8:00 p.m. on Fox.
Who will be watching this show rather than the Republican convention? What will BO gain from this "exchange" other than drawing attention away from McCain's big night? Are there any risks for BO or long term consequences likely coming out of this program?
37 million is not really incredible.
7 percent of America did not know who Obama was before his speech.
66 percent of America did not know who Palin was before her speech.
Therefore, more people would tune in to see her than to see him.
Scott kleeb
Or
Sam Adams
I think its hard to project too far into the future. Eliott Spitzer, until recently, was a rising star in the democratic party. Along theat vein, who knows what dirst will surface in the near future that could bring down a politician.
If Obama wins I think a major shake-up in the Republican party will occur.
During the Democratic primaries I thought the people on the right promoting Hillary Clinton were doing it (not just because they thought they could beat her) but potentially her win over Barack Obama would have created a major fissure in the party.
jrs: I think the Obama/O'Reilly thing is an honest effort on Obama's part to both be inclusive and to show that he's not afraid of the right wing media machine.
Of all the Fox hacks, O'Reilly is probably the most reasonable. He's in the tank for the right but has a centrist streak, and as long as you don't get on his bulldog side he can be fair.
It's not like he's going on with that lying sack of shit Hannity or anything.
It's risky but I trust him to do it well. Sorta like Saddleback. I'm sure the right wing hacks will say O'Reilly tore him apart, but I think independents will give him points for it.
I don't think O'Reilly can eat him BO alive tonight, and as long as that does not happen he should be fine.
The head of Fox News and Murdoch himself promised the campaign this would not be a gotcha interview.
One of the biggest mistakes Kerry made was not going on Bill O. Believe it or not, he actually wasn't a fan of the swiftboaters.
you can also refresh the comments box by hitting F5
Governor Romney will be 65 in 2012. He's not really the future of the Republican Party. Demographically, Republicans know they are losing young people in a big way. They've got to get younger after this election.
Someone in the media with balls. And it's not what you think!
Updates on main page, left column.
Obama's win percentage now up over 70%.
Popular vote % up over 50%.
I wonder... will Obama win Alaska now because folks there already know Palin or will McCain win it because folks there want to get rid of her?
the question wasn't "most likely in 2012/2016," the question was most likely, eventually.
hillary has to be the wrong answer - even if you think mccain's got a 1:3 chance, hillary wouldn't be an overwhelming favorite to beat him in 2012. and by 2016, she'll have to face questions about age and decide whether she still wants to put in the effort - and then she STILL wouldn't be the overwhelming favorite.
i think the #1 most likely has to be someone younger. i voted jindal.
Call me on the win poercentage next week, we need to see the convention and National Enquirer effects play out a bit.
Guys, the National Enquirer story isn't going anywhere. Since it is about a Republican and not one of their darling Democrats (read: Edwards) they would have picked up on it by now where there anything to it.
Unless Palin admits it or theres evidence, its B.S.
The smart money's on Hillary in 2016, especially after last week.
Brian Schweitzer is a sleeper. He'll definately emerge as a star in the years to come. And unlike that evil twat we saw last night, he'll actually be popular with the electorate. Schweitzer could also be the perfect contrast to Obama's definitive statesman-like presidency.
Biden could run in 2016. He certainly has the potential to be the most popular VP in decades. But I doubt he'd go for it.
Jindal is too creepy looking and insane. Not a good combo.
Btw, Palin's speech polarized people. That's a fact. Whether it'll be reflected in the daily trackers remains to be seen.
I'm thinking Schweitzer. Here's my analysis: If Obama serves two terms Biden will be in Grandpa McCain territory in terms of age. HIllary Clinton will be 68, Palin will be a dimly-remembered footnote and the rest of the GOP field from today will be eight years older than they are now. Romney is the only one from the pack who I think might have a chance -- and he's not likely, given that evangelicals won't vote for him. Jindal is possible, but I think it's more likely that in 2016the GOP will recruit someone who isn't even on the national stage yet. They'll have eight years to come up with a candidate who's better than what they have now.
Given all that I'm thinking Schweitzer. The Democrats will have time to get him into the national spotlight somewhere in the Obama administration so the public gets comfortable with him.
This is of course assuming a lot -- namely, that Obama wins in November and he has two incontrovertibly successful terms. If he's forced out after one term, or worse yet loses this year, of course everything changes.
is the interview with O'Reilly Live or pretaped? I got the feeling that it was pretaped.
My pick: someone most of us haven't even heard of yet, and they will run in 2016 after a second Obama term.
Who would have put Obama in the running back in 2000?
From Drudge:
"37,244,000 WATCHED PALIN SPEECH ... [24,029,000 WATCHED BIDEN; 38,379,000 WATCHED OBAMA."
One key turning point in this election will be the numbers for MCain's speech tonight.
Viewers tuned into to the pilot... will they stay for the series?
Re: "Younger" and "Future of the Republican Party"...
Look at the GOP candidate this year.
Tough question:
1. Palin: If McCain wins, she has a not insubstantial chance of becoming president through McCain's death or incapacitation. She'd probably also be the next in line to the R nomination if McCain didn't run in 2012 or in 2016 if McCain wins twice. But, winning after 3 or 4 straight R terms will be exceedingly difficult, even if she gets the nomination. So, she's got 2-3 paths, all unlikely.
2. Biden--If Obama wins, then Obama runs again in 2012 and Biden is too old to run in 2016 (especially after two prior failed runs). If Obama loses, then Biden is somewhat tarred with the defeat and there are better stronger candidates ready to go in 2012. Biden's only realistic path is if Obama wins and something happens to him in office.
3. Clinton--I think she'll be the D frontrunner in 2012 if Obama loses, but there are other strong candidates so it's not a gimme. By 2016, her time will have passed.
4. Romney--If McCain wins, he won't have a chance until 2016 and by then he'll have been out of the spotlight way too long. His speech clearly set him up as the conservative choice in 2012 if McCain loses. While Palin looks like she occupies some of the same political real estate and is much hotter right now, her rep will be tarnished if McCain loses now. I'm not particulary impressed with Romney as a campaigner also.
5. Jindal--He'll be a possible R nominee for many cycles to come. He seems like a serious candidate as well with a good personal story. Unless something trips him up, he's a future leader of the party and a definite presidential contender. Lots of paths available to him.
6. Warner--popular, centrist candidate. If Obama loses, he'll have to beat Clinton for the 2012 nomination or wait until 2016 and young enough to go in 2012, 2016 or beyond.
7. Schweitzer--similar sitution to Warner, except a little lower profile and, IMHO, not as good a candidate.
My guess for most likely to eventually become president:
1. Jindal
2. Palin
3. Warner
4. Clinton
5. Schweitzer
6. Romney
7. Biden
If Obama wins, Palin will be working on Fox news before the end of 2009. My guess is that she never runs in another national campaign, just like Ferraro.
is the interview with O'Reilly Live or pretaped? I got the feeling that it was pretaped.
mike, I think the GOP might want to get younger after this year BUT will they? Is any younger person in the Republican Party going to risk running against a popular incumbent President Obama? Sarah Palin might conclude this is her best chance, but I would imagine other young GOPers might wait it out and run in 2016 instead.
I vote for Schweitzer.
What about Jeff Bush?.
Meh, I voted Warner; but then a minute later I thought that he would be too "safe" after 8 years of a triumphant Obama government (a few of those with 2/3 senate majority). The bar for the next president will be rather low because of Bush. And there are some easy populist moves ready to get instant approval: bringing troops home, symbolic lobbyist clubbing, announcement of a new energy policy etc....
I think either Obama will get a 2/3 Senate majority or McCain will get a conservative Supreme Court majority. The latter possibility would make a Jindal or Palin presidency very likely.
Jeb, obviously.
mikewpbfl, I'd be shocked if tonight's numbers matched or even got close to Obama's or Palin's. He will be up against opening night for the NFL, for one thing.
is the interview with O'Reilly Live or pretaped? I got the feeling that it was pretaped.
Bushes are done.
Even Jeb said "nunca" (never) when interviewed on spanish radio referring to whether he would run for office again. Hes retired.
Credit said...
If Obama wins, Palin will be working on Fox news before the end of 2009. My guess is that she never runs in another national campaign, just like Ferraro.
Brad says:
Very true. This is our winner!!!!
As Biden is probably too old to run in 2016, and Clinton is clearly the front-runner for 2012 if Obama loses to McCain, I see two viable paths to the party nomination for Clinton, while I see only one for most others. That alone makes her a frontrunner.
The MSM is predicting a HUGE bump in the polls now that the RNC got ginormous ratings.
Anyone know whose speech Obama overlaps with tonight?
No matter which party wins this cycle Palin will be the one to beat next time - by both sides. If the Republicans lose this time around, with an 80% approval rating as governor, she can hold that position or transition to the senate; whichever appears to be a better springboard to the presidency. If they win of course she is well placed for the next cycle. The Republicans have a strong farm team in Jindal, Steele, Hunter, etc and will really make inroads in the Hispanic vote if they win this time and McCain's immigration package gets implemented.
Palin is a bimbo who will be lucky if she's still on McCain's ticket in 2 weeks.
Yes, even with all the "full support" blather we heard last night and her strong speech.
Name one loser VP that ran for President after they lost. One.
I can't think of any.
If Obama wins, Palin will be working on Fox news before the end of 2009. My guess is that she never runs in another national campaign, just like Ferraro.
You... do realize she's still Governor, right? And that she's popular enough to easily get re-elected for as long as she wants? Palin on Fox? That's one of the silliest things I've ever heard.
I think the best alternative for the GOP if McCain loses is Bobby Jindal.
McCain is too old and the GOP need young people.
The only certainty is: not a Republican.
I think Palin will want a bigger spotlight that little AK after this.
I'm hearing a lot of 'By 2016 Hillary will be too old' talk. Won't she still be years younger than McCain is now? I'm not saying there aren't other reasons she won't run/win, but I'm curious about the argument that her 'age' will disqualify her. Especially in the middle of an election where someone even older is currently a presidential nominee.
"Name one loser VP that ran for President after they lost. One."
Lieberman.
"Name one loser VP that ran for President after they lost."
Just simply "ran" as in announced one day, "I am running for President" would be John Edwards, of course.
Actually got his party's nomination, I think you'd have to go to Bob Dole, and he got the nomination 16 years later (he was Ford's running mate in 1976, for your kids).
Actually got elected President, I think you'd have to go back to FDR.
Markymark, We truly do not know how popular a president Obama will be. There is one known material event that he will play a part - tax reform. The Bush tax cuts are done in 2010. He can let them expire, he can reform the tax code entirely (an option I'd like to see), or he can modify them or adopt them wholesale. The war/terrorism/foreign policy events are total unknowns.
Carter was popular going into 1977. Look how that turned out.
I once thumbed through an Almanac of American Politics from 1986. Bill Clinton was in there as Governor of Arkansas and, IIRC, the tone was like "Some people even say he's a dark horse to be President!" You can smell the sarcasm in the tone. Look how that turned out.
If Obama-Biden ticket wins in 2008.
Sarah Palin has to first face re-election as AK Governor in 2010. We have to defeat her in 2010 to end her career for national office in 2012.
Bobby Jindal- is the Republican's Barack Obama- a Non White Conservative is going to be the Republican Standard Bearer in 2012 or 2016.
If Old Man Mccain Wins- The next President is Brian Schwietzer based on his performance in the Convention based on the fact he is a popular Democratic Governor from a rural state and he lived in the MidEast.
Bob Dole had a lot of space between that failed VP run and his nomination (20 years, to be exact).
Twenty years ago, Sarah Palin was in college.
Rhys-
How could he drop her now? The base loves her. He would have had to have her drop out last night.
37 million is very impressive for a VP candidate. I got it shows just how totally unknown she was to the general public before now.
Given those numbers, and also the fact that the Convention doesn't seem to be bringing Obama's numbers own so far, I think the bounce from her speech will take Obama down to about a lead of 3%, when all is said and done.
Rhys shes a benefit to the ticket now after last night. Even Norah O'Donell said "the champagne corks are popping".
Palin with a McCain win. Chelsea Clinton with Obama.
On a side note, does anyone know if McCain is dropping out of public funding
OR
has anyone seen any increased ad buys in the battleground states if McCain is keeping the public funds?
Would McCain skipping public funding change the nature if the race?
"How could he drop her now? The base loves her. He would have had to have her drop out last night."
He doesn't drop her, the Roveites force her to resign. It's not like she doesn't have enough excuses.
The "base", once riled up, will mostly stay riled up. They can bring in someone less shitty who still appeals to the same voters. The independents will take a second look, and Obama/Biden have to switch gears.
If the numbers continue to look bad, and especially if the scandals don't go away, I see this maybe happening.
If there's *ANY* truth the affair rumor, she's toast.
Rhys... NO NO NO - DON'T bring up that she's a bimbo! Why not hand a lead pipe with blades to your political opponents??? It's like you're saying this...
"Dear VC, Oz, and PeteKent - My dearest friends, I thought of you today and wanted you to have this highly explosive, lethal ammunition to use as you see fit. With love of America and sincerity, I remain truly yours, Rhys."
My apolitical network called her mean and shrill.
This may be Palin's one chance to make it big nationally. Although she has been popular in Alaska, the state has yet to see the ramifications of her policies. She has taxed the hell out of the oil companies, and there are many skeptics about whether her plan for the natural gas pipeline will actually lead to anything at all. Four years from now she'll actually have a record as governor, so the nation will actually get to see if her "executive experience" REALLY counts. I don't think this bodes well for her.
To Tone Def Libs, words you should not use to refer to Sarah Palin:
*Shrill
*Mean
*Bitch
*Bimbo
*Barbie
*MILF
Etc, etc.
"Rhys shes a benefit to the ticket now after last night."
You're letting your enthusiasm get ahead of your common sense.
Be honest: what exactly could she have done to screw up last night? She walked out onto the stage, waved a bit, read SOMEONE ELSE'S speech off a teleprompter, waved some more, hugged her kids, and left.
In the meantime, Obama's numbers have gone *UP* since she was chosen. Yeah, I know, you're going to say that will change after the speech. Temporarily, sure.
On the whole? She's a HORRIBLE pick.
Get real, VC. I know you aren't this dense.
Hey -- the chart on the side shows Obama now with over 50% of the Popular Vote.
Isn't that the first time that's been the case on here?
"Bob Dole had a lot of space between that failed VP run and his nomination (20 years, to be exact)."
Yeah, I know, I was going to say you have to go back to FDR and I kind of vaguely remembered him at the last minute (and somehow also managed to screw up the math about how long there was between the two events).
I could see Palin still having a shot at the GOP nomination in 2012 if she and McCain lose. She appears to have a HUGE base of support. If she replaces Stevens in the Senate that'd also shore up her resume (although by 2012, I doubt anybody would claim she was "inexperienced" simply based on the fact that she ran for VP this time around). I do think she'd have trouble winning a general election, though.
Guys, the National Enquirer story isn't going anywhere. Since it is about a Republican and not one of their darling Democrats (read: Edwards) they would have picked up on it by now where there anything to it.
VC-
Don't be so sure. Prior to Friday last week they hadn't done any digging at all because she was a first-term governor from an out-of-the-way state. No one, not even McCain had dug at all. Even if the story were true, it's not going to move copy. Now that she's a VP candidate, they can throw money at people to get the dirt, and put it at every checkout counter in every grocery store America.
I'm not a lib, I'm not running for office, I'm not trying to keep a job as an NBC commentator.
And I am not into the PC bullshit.
Sarah Palin is a mean-spirited, fringe-wacko bimbo.
I don't know how Palin's speech will play in the heartland nor do I know how the GOP convention will help/hinder McCain's chances.
But one thing I do know is this -- Pat Buchanan was THRILLED with Sarah Palin's speech and has been quite happy with the GOP convention thus far. Probably because it reminds him of the GOP convention in 1992 -- you know, the one where good 'ol Pat put the final knife in Bush Sr's back.
If a fringe right-wing reactionary psycho like Buchanan loves your speech, there's a good chance it will not go over very well with moderate Independents, Democrats or socially moderate Republicans.
Rhys we still haven't made it to the third day of the convention when the bounce starts. We'll know then. I at least think instead of being Eagleton she is now at least a notch above Dan Quayle.
Rhys-
I agree with most of your analysis above, but there is no way they can drop her. Who would take it?
I guess there is the NE scenario where they find even more skeletons, but even then dropping her is unlikely.
VC-
She still has a great oppotunity to be worse than Quayle. What else is lurking? Can she really delay the Troopergate report?
Palin is all horn and no drive shaft, just a petty career mayor who by default got a shot at the big time, she has to come out from hiding and defend her lousy record sooner or later and then it is all over. Obama just bitch slapped her back to bear country at a press conference in Ohio, dismissed her with a flick of the wrist and said he had been called worse things during pick up basketball games.
"Probably because it reminds him of the GOP convention in 1992"
That's what it reminds me of too. The 1992 Republican Convention is what convinced my wife to vote for Bill Clinton (not that this anecdote is worth a damn thing). I voted for Bush in that election (not that anybody cares).
You guys are about three days behind.
I'm not scared of troopergate. If a scandal doesn't involve sex or treason the populace at large doesn't care.
"I agree with most of your analysis above, but there is no way they can drop her. Who would take it?"
Someone shameless like Romney, or some elder statesman as a favor to the party brass.
"I guess there is the NE scenario where they find even more skeletons, but even then dropping her is unlikely."
Oh I agree. It's not likely.
The GOP has swallowed so much of their own Koolaid that they think they are invincible, and that they really CAN fool all of the people all of the time.
But at the same time, there are a few intelligent people there. And if it becomes apparent that she's a ball and chain on McCain, she'll go.
I think Obama will win this year and hold the Presidency for eight. After that I think the Republicans will be heavily favored. So at 45, I think Bobby Jindal is the best bet. However, I think it is more likely to come from 'the field' with someone bursting onto the scene in a few years. Palin could have a chance, but with the amount of scandals she's accumulated in such a short time, I think she's out. Whitman and Fiorina did not inspire me. So here's my predictions for the next two elections following this one:
Obama/Biden v. Romney/Snowe = Dems
McCaskill/Smith(Adam) v. Jindal (or someone of the blue which is more likely)/Crist (if he get's married)
I know Romney likes Snowe and McCaskill likes Adam Smith, so that's why they are there. Not sure how much she knows Warner or Schweitzer.
VC-
Tell that to Sen. Stevens.
It took them 50 some odd years to get Stevens even though hes crooked as hell. You just proved my point!
VC-
I'm not scared of troopergate. If a scandal doesn't involve sex or treason the populace at large doesn't care.
Tell it to Nixon. People care about abuse of power. It's at least part of the reason Bushies are excited about an approval rating of 34%.
"I'm not scared of troopergate. If a scandal doesn't involve sex or treason the populace at large doesn't care."
She's got both of those two.
Can anyone think of another candidate with so many scandals still on a ticket 2 months out? Not to mention one who also brings so little of positive value other than bullshit talking points.
Whitman and Fiorina did suck didn't they? The old white guys in the audience did them no favors either...
To tone deaf conservatives:
Words that you should not use against Obama:
Georgia Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland today said:
"Just from what little I’ve seen of her [Michelle] and Mr. Obama, Sen. Obama, they're a member of an elitist-class individual that thinks that they're uppity." Asked to clarify that he used the word “uppity,” Westmoreland said, “Uppity, yeah.”
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/westmoreland-calls-obama-uppity-2008-09-04.html
The National Enquirer is running a sotry on Plain this week that says she had an affair with her husband's business partner a few years ago. You can say what you want about the Enquirer, but they broke the Edwards affair story and they stand by this one...............
Rhys-
No - but that is why I am giddy.
Who the fuck says "uppity" anymore? Jesus.
Is he going to call him a "mulatto" next?
Anyone know where I can watch Obama's press conference online? TIA.
Where's "barracuda lipstick" Palin's press conference?
"Palin could have a chance, but with the amount of scandals she's accumulated in such a short time, I think she's out."
It really only seems like a lot of scandals because they've all hit within the past 5 days and because most of them haven't been resolved. If, for example, the Natl. Enq. story turns out to be untrue, it won't even be remembered one year from now, much less four.
Hillary Clinton (Whitewater, et al), McCain (Keating 5, et al), and Biden (plaigiarism, et al) have similar numbers of scandals. But their scandals are old news, America (and/or the media) have already formed our opinion on these. Four years from now, if Palin survives this campaign, Palin will get the same benefit of the doubt. What will sink her electoral chances in 2012 are her far-right policy positions far more than her 2008 scandals.
KennyB, VC-
And he said it twice! You'd think that when the reporter asks about a word, klaxons should start going off in a Politicians head.
If Palin were to be running for President in 2012, that would most likely mean that McCain had won ( and shuffled off the mortal stage in one fashion or another
). But in that case, Hillary would certainly be running.
If Biden were to be running, that would mean Obama had either lost in 2008 or not survived the term.
But again, I would see Hillary trumping Biden, even if he were the incumbent - if she wanted to.
tim R-
The Enquirer is really good at dribbling info out over weeks. Next week they will tell us who it was, then they will find another angle. Then they will interview family members about hubby's feelings and why he stayed.
They almost might hit scandal two at about week three.
When is his press conference? CNN.com usually carries these things live.
...
Fron an article in the Knoxville paper:
'In response, the McCain campaign said in a statement, "Our campaign has been consistent and clear: This election is about whose judgment you can trust to move America forward," and it argued that Obama doesn't have that judgment'
Notice the McCain camp not harping on experience anymore. Now its about judgment. Did they just surrender the argument like many predicted, officially?
They don't say uppity anymore. They say elitist. ;-)
pmoc-
Don't they have to abandon judgment to? I mean McCain picked Palin, what kind of judgment is that?
The Enquirer is really good at dribbling info out over weeks.
They make more money this way. It's like having to buy the next issue of a magazine to read the next chapter of a serialized novel.
Elitist isn't racial. We called Kerry and Dukakis elitist, too.
Bill Clinton not so much, instead he was painted as sex-crazed white trash with a college education (which is entirely accurate!)
"Don't they have to abandon judgment to? I mean McCain picked Palin, what kind of judgment is that?"
It's great judgment! She's amazing! She's a leader! She's a new generation of Republicans!
LOL.
VirCon,
Nixon did win after losing, and then humiliated in a run for Gov of CA, so I think it fits yoru criteria.
Do you think Palin is of that stock?
No, Palin is not Nixon. Shes a female Spiro Agnew.
I figured both Clinton and Biden would not be interested in 2016 as they will be too old. I picked Schweitzer.
But if Clinton was interested, I would vote for her.
VC-
No, Palin is not Nixon. Shes a female Spiro Agnew.
What ever became of him?
Is Palin going to forget to pay her taxes? Maybe she already has! OOOOooooo....
"
What ever became of him?"
He had to resign for reasons of corruption and was later convicted on all kinds of shady stuff. He used to take illegal $1,000 cash kickbacks (this is in late 60s dollars, mind you) as Governor of Maryland and bitch that it wasn't enough!
VC-
That was a joke.
Virginia Conservative said...
Elitist isn't racial. We called Kerry and Dukakis elitist, too.
Right. It's Arrogant that means the same thing as Uppity.
Unless it's used on Sarah Palin. Then it's sexist.
Mason-
Sorry, my snark detector is off. But Agnew did become Vice President and played hatchet man very well.
Sorry, my snark detector is off.
You should get that fixed. Surfing without a snark detector is like skiing naked.
Nate/Sean - 2016!!
Seriously, so much depends on the current election outcome. If McCain wins, he's likely to have a heart attack or resign in the next 8 years and then Palin becomes the 45th president. However, McCain isn't currently favored to win.
If Obama wins, he'll likely be in office for 8 years. By then the race will be wide open to new contenders. So if Obama wins this year, in 2016:
* Palin: Will be nothing more than an anecdote.
* Biden: Will be too old
* Clinton: Will be too old
* Romney: Possible contender, but if wasn't the right man this year, will he really be the president of the future?
* Jindal: Maybe. He's gotten off to a bumpy start in Louisiana though.
* Warner: Maybe, and my most likely. He seems like he's prepping himself for some future primary.
* Schweitzer: He doesn't seem very presidential.
My gut says nobody on the list will be the 45th. The nation, the parties, the issues and the players will have changed by then. Back in 2000, who could have guessed that Obama and Palin would have been involved in the race this year?
Here's an interesting scenario
Obama wins in 2008. In 2012 he runs with a new VP (maybe Schweitzer or another new face) to prepare him/her for 2016
In 2016, that VP as the incumbent could have the advantage (assuming nation doing ok) over any republican.
* Clinton: Will be too old
* Romney: Possible contender, but if wasn't the right man this year, will he really be the president of the future?
How can Clinton be too old in 2016, but not Romney, when Romney is nearly eight months older, and women live considerably longer?
Post a Comment