Support NeoGAF

[MetatronM]

does he have a real chance to be president?

No, he's just a nightmare for the GOP is all.

 

[TheOMan]

Oh wow.

 

[TheBowen]

Absolutely not, lol.

If Trump wins the nomination for some crazy ass reason there is no fucking way he would beat Hillary.

Hillary is going to have Bill Clinton and Obama running around talking for her. That vs Trump? yeah... he would lose in one of the most spectacular fashions we've ever seen.

I think you underestimate the absolute pure idiocy that trump is

Only stupid/racist/homophobic/sexist people vote for trump. Unfortunately, that's alot of people

Im not even american and the mere thought of trump even being in the primarys just makes me sade for humanity.

 

[Modest Mauser]

I'm starting to get scared of this guy legit getting the nomination and possibly winning. He's a giant gimmick and people are falling for it. Do you guys think he can rope in the Dem leaning swing voters?

You should be happy if he gets the nomination. It will just guarantee the Democrats a victory

 

[spock]

I'm starting to get scared of this guy legit getting the nomination and possibly winning. He's a giant gimmick and people are falling for it. Do you guys think he can rope in the Dem leaning swing voters?

Posted in another thread, but I think Trump is going to continue to grow as a real possibility simply for the fact that it seems there are independents and folks on the left (and right) who see voting for trump as a way to give a big fuck you to the current system, its not even about his actual stand on things. I think some here are underestimating how many people DO NOT want politics as usual, which is what Hillary and every one except for trump represent.

Trump is intentionally capitalizing on that polarization. Personally I dont want a normal politician, however that doesn't mean I want trump, but I can feel the energy hes creating. I voted for Obama twice, I lean Dem...However I will swing my vote wherever. I live in New Hampshire and I am not alone in that stance.

Watch for them t-shirts basically stating a vote for trump is a vote against the status quo and a broken system.

Trump is the black swan...

 

[steveovig]

Posted in another thread, but I think Trump is going to continue to grow as a real possibility simply for the fact that it seems there are independents and folks on the left (and right) who see voting for trump as a way to give a big fuck you to the current system, its not even about his actual stand on things. I think some here are underestimating how many people DO NOT want politics as usual, which is what Hillary and every one except for trump represent.

Trump is intentionally capitalizing on that polarization. Personally I dont want a normal politician, however that doesn't mean I want trump, but I can feel the energy hes creating. I voted for Obama twice, I lean Dem...However I will swing my vote wherever. I live in New Hampshire and I am not alone in that stance.

Watch for them t-shirts basically stating a vote for trump is a vote against the status quo and a broken system.

Trump is the black swan...

You seem like a reasonable and smart person, and you say you'll swing wherever. Yet, it's fair to say you're more informed than the average voter, why still throw your vote towards Trump with all the info we have on this guy being a total buffoon? I see your point on looking for someone different but this guy?

 

[speculawyer]

This guy. I'm laughing but I'm shaking my head.

 

[spock]

You seem like a reasonable and smart person, and you say you'll swing wherever. Yet, it's fair to say you're more informed than the average voter, why still throw your vote towards Trump with all the info we have on this guy being a total buffoon? I see your point on looking for someone different but this guy?

If the vote was today I would NOT vote for Trump (against Hillary that is). If Trump is going to swing me he will have to get more clear on things as time goes on. However he is in an interesting position. I personally dont believe hes as stupid or crazy as some make him out to be. The guy knows his marketing (unique selling proposition) given his business background but that will only get him so far. I'm not sure what his approach is going to be after this first phase but I see him having to play things out in phases, working on building out his appeal.

 

[LyleLanley]

If the vote was today I would NOT vote for Trump (against Hillary that is). If Trump is going to swing me he will have to get more clear on things as time goes on. However he is in an interesting position. I personally dont believe hes as stupid or crazy as some make him out to be. The guy knows his marketing (unique selling proposition) given his business background but that will only get him so far. I'm not sure what his approach is going to be after this first phase but I see him having to play things out in phases, working on building out his appeal.

What is his interesting position in your opinion? I've said this before about Ben Carson but the same applies here, what makes him qualified to be President of the U.S.?

 

[Valhelm]

It seemed like most of the candidates during the debate were equating Iran and ISIS, despite the fact that Iran is one of the few countries actually actively fighting against ISIS.

A lot of that is just rhetoric, though. Many Americans don't understand the Shia-Sunni divide at all, and assume that "radical Islam" is a single entity supported by ISIS and Iran in tandem.

 

[jtb]

Trump is a misogynist and a racist, to say nothing of his non-existent policy plan. I mean, feel free to vote for him if your disdain for the "system" is greater than your respect for basic human dignity.

 

[hoos30]

How am I supposed to reconcile it with this:

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...debate-donald-trump-biggest-loser-121146.html

Edit: Oh, this NBC one is an online poll :/

GOP insiders, including Fix News, want nothing more than for Trump to flame out, even if they have to create the narrative themselves.

 

[Yoda]

You guys really can't be that surprised can you? He got where he is by not being politically correct. The current shitstorm is over another issue of political correctness. Fox News tried to kill his candidacy with what made his candidacy in the first place. There one thing they can do to make his supporters more sure of their pick is trying to use either of the following two lines:

1. He's not electable.

• The base heard this in 2008, got McCain, and lost.
• The base heard this in 2012, got Romney, and lost.

It's simply not a credible argument to hardcore conservatives, the same argument was used against Reagan, and he was the last republican President who won the popular vote vs. an incumbent of the other party.

2. "[statement] is crossing the line, this has gone too far!"
Had he implied Hilary Clinton was "bleeding from where ever" would they have dis invited him from the Red State gathering? I'd say not a chance. He named out another woman during Megan Kelly's sexism question and demeaned her too... any outrage? No. Selective outrage + telling people how they ought to feel about someone's statement as opposed to letting people make up their own mind is only going to solidify Trump's base.

 

[spock]

What is his interesting position in your opinion? I've said this before about Ben Carson but the same applies here, what makes him qualified to be President of the U.S.?

It's pretty straightforward. Right now his position on things is secondary to what represents. Is he qualified to be president? Can't say either way. But his appeal is simple. Politics and the current crop of politicians have a system they work in. Its almost formulaic in the way they act, approach, view things, etc.

Trump simply represents someone who is not cut from the same cloth. He doesnt play the game by their rules. That alone has a HUGE appeal in people who think the political system is fubar and most of the people who are part of that system are to caught up in it.

Trump could rattle the cage...and there are a lot of people who feel the cage needs a good shaking.

However that appeal is only going to get him so far. In my opinion he has to approach this in phases. In the next phase hes going to have to start talking about more details to pull those are willing to rattle the cage but not burn it to the ground.

To many people are discounting him, I really do think hes the potential black swan at least for now.

 

[hoos30]

PPP tweeted earlier that they surveyed 180 people in Iowa and nobody supported Christie.

I can see him dropping out.

Iowa is dead to Christie, he can never appeal to the evangelicals that run the show there. His only hope is to follow the McCain track and concentrate on NH and SC.

 

[Team Alucard]

When they do these polls are they focused strictly on Republican voters, or everyone?

Because I'm sure Trump has a lot of support from people who are just anti-establishment and ultimately have no intention to actually vote in the primaries.

 

[Eidan]

When they do these polls are they focused strictly on Republican voters, or everyone?

Because I'm sure Trump has a lot of support from people who are just anti-establishment and ultimately have no intention to actually vote in the primaries.

Republican likely voters.

 

[jtb]

You guys really can't be that surprised can you? He got where he is by not being politically correct. The current shitstorm is over another issue of political correctness. Fox News tried to kill his candidacy with what made his candidacy in the first place. There one thing they can do to make his supporters more sure of their pick is trying to use either of the following two lines:

1. He's not electable.

• The base heard this in 2008, got McCain, and lost.
• The base heard this in 2012, got Romney, and lost.

It's simply not a credible argument to hardcore conservatives, the same argument was used against Reagan, and he was the last republican President who won the popular vote vs. an incumbent of the other party.

2. "[statement] is crossing the line, this has gone too far!"
Had he implied Hilary Clinton was "bleeding from where ever" would they have dis invited him from the Red State gathering? I'd say not a chance. He named out another woman during Megan Kelly's sexism question and demeaned her too... any outrage? No. Selective outrage + telling people how they ought to feel about someone's statement as opposed to letting people make up their own mind is only going to solidify Trump's base.

I don't know. I think you underestimate the deep well of good will Fox News has. They can and will keep hammering Trump on being a liberal and for being pals with Hillary (see: Christie's hug with Obama). Trump has a plurality of voters, but that is as much an effect of just how diverse and dilute the pool of candidates is—once the first few fringe candidates start dropping out, we'll really see how long Trump can last.

 

[Alchemy]

Trump being so successful in GOP circles does not reflect well on GOP voters.

 

[jtb]

It's pretty straightforward. Right now his position on things is secondary to what represents. Is he qualified to be president? Can't say either way. But his appeal is simple. Politics and the current crop of politicians have a system they work in. Its almost formulaic in the way they act, approach, view things, etc.

Trump simply represents someone who is not cut from the same cloth. He doesnt play the game by their rules. That alone has a HUGE appeal in people who think the political system is fubar and most of the people who are part of that system are to caught up in it.

Trump could rattle the cage...and there are a lot of people who feel the cage needs a good shaking.

However that appeal is only going to get him so far. In my opinion he has to approach this in phases. In the next phase hes going to have to start talking about more details to pull those are willing to rattle the cage but not burn it to the ground.

To many people are discounting him, I really do think hes the potential black swan at least for now.

There's jadedness and then there's just outright discounting the political process, the constitution of the united states, the need for legislation, etc. The problem with this line of thinking is that it appeals to people who don't buy into the political process.

In other words: People who don't vote.

I think the inherent weakness of relying on such a strategy in an election is obvious.

 

[LyleLanley]

It's pretty straightforward. Right now his position on things is secondary to what represents. Is he qualified to be president? Can't say either way. But his appeal is simple. Politics and the current crop of politicians have a system they work in. Its almost formulaic in the way they act, approach, view things, etc.

Trump simply represents someone who is not cut from the same cloth. He doesnt play the game by their rules. That alone has a HUGE appeal in people who think the political system is fubar and most of the people who are part of that system are to caught up in it.

Trump could rattle the cage...and there are a lot of people who feel the cage needs a good shaking.

However that appeal is only going to get him so far. In my opinion he has to approach this in phases. In the next phase hes going to have to start talking about more details to pull those are willing to rattle the cage but not burn it to the ground.

To many people are discounting him, I really do think hes the potential black swan at least for now.

You don't find any of this depressing? That a guy without any qualifications or any potential policies laid out can be seen as a legitimate candidate because he's "rattling the cage" by giving a bunch of racist, xenophobic and sexist comments?

 

[neogaffer1]

PPP is polling right now and they've indicated no change in anyone's numbers other than Christie and Fiorina. If Donald "A lot of people are switching to these really long putters, very unattractive" Trump was doing differently, wouldn't they have said something?

not the guy you quoted but i'm more looking at if jeb dropped from #2 or not. this polls says so, while PPP seems to indicate that he hasn't, otherwise they would've said.

 

[titiklabingapat]

I think you underestimate the absolute pure idiocy that trump is

Only stupid/racist/homophobic/sexist people vote for trump. Unfortunately, that's alot of people

Im not even american and the mere thought of trump even being in the primarys just makes me sade for humanity.

Nah, I'm not that worried. There was group of people, a good 25% to 30% that stuck with GWB at the end of his term when it was completely clear he was a disaster. It's these same people that will vote for Trump.

You might get these people to the polls excited with Trump, but believe me, the latino and hispanic organizations will make sure latinos and hispanics get out the vote too.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

Stunning.

 

[Arrogant Bastard]

See you don't need to try and read into shit he is saying, you get straight sexist rhetoric right from the goat.

 

[speculawyer]

Trump being so successful in GOP circles does not reflect well on GOP voters.

This came up on Maher's show. Mary Matlin and Steve Schmidt were crapping all over Trump and Bill Maher just said "well this is who your people want!" Hilarious.

 

[Mxrz]

And people thought Jeb was a better choice than W. If not for Fox news/Rove propping him up, he already be out.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

So Jeb is polling in the single digits in his own party a little over a year until his alleged election night.

At what point does this become unsalvageable? It's not like people don't know who he is.

 

[The Flop]

When will we get real post debate polls? I believe Fiorina will deservedly move up, but to tied for 3rd I'm not so sure.

 

[Link]

See you don't need to try and read into shit he is saying, you get straight sexist rhetoric right from the goat.

Eh, I wouldn't call that comment sexist. He's just being a jerk to her like anyone else.

 

[Gotchaye]

It's pretty straightforward. Right now his position on things is secondary to what represents. Is he qualified to be president? Can't say either way. But his appeal is simple. Politics and the current crop of politicians have a system they work in. Its almost formulaic in the way they act, approach, view things, etc.

Trump simply represents someone who is not cut from the same cloth. He doesnt play the game by their rules. That alone has a HUGE appeal in people who think the political system is fubar and most of the people who are part of that system are to caught up in it.

Trump could rattle the cage...and there are a lot of people who feel the cage needs a good shaking.

However that appeal is only going to get him so far. In my opinion he has to approach this in phases. In the next phase hes going to have to start talking about more details to pull those are willing to rattle the cage but not burn it to the ground.

To many people are discounting him, I really do think hes the potential black swan at least for now.

I don't see how this can work.

Yes, lots of people want a "different kind of candidate". Practically everyone does. But they all want a different kind of different kind of candidate. The whole reason that typical candidates are so bland is that that's how you can put together a majority.

Trump's appeal right now to the people who actually want to vote for Trump is not about being different from other candidates per se. It's that he's different from other candidates in a particular way - in his giving voice to the anger and resentment of a significant part of the right in an unapologetic way. The whole point of Trump is that he can't appeal to people who aren't True Conservatives. The people who support him oppose liberals - that's pretty much the entirety of their politics. They're mad as hell and they want somebody who tells liberals to go fuck themselves.

He's really just the logical endpoint of where the Republican Party's been headed since around the 2008 election. There's no there there. There can't be. The moment you try to propose a concrete plan for immigration reform or health care or entitlement reform or whatever you get torn apart. It's about substance-less opposition to whatever it is liberals want, plus abortion. Go look at Romney/Ryan from 2012, which was sold by the party establishment as being the best option for having a serious contender for the presidency - other than some enormous tax cuts there really weren't many policy proposals. The most thought-out thing they had was voucherizing Medicare, and it's something they were very cagey about. On Obamacare the ticket and the party never got past the slogan "repeal and replace", except with some of the same talk we heard at the debates about tinkering with interstate regulations. After the election the party thought it might take on immigration reform and it was a disaster.

So of course Trump's not going to come out with innovative policy proposals that address serious problems we've got. No possible solution is acceptable to his strongest supporters. If he does try this he risks his support among hardcore conservatives.

 

[foodtaster]

See you don't need to try and read into shit he is saying, you get straight sexist rhetoric right from the goat.

Though I think Trump is a sexist, I see nothing sexist about what he tweeted.

 

[B-Dubs]

When will we get real post debate polls? I believe Fiorina will deservedly move up, but to tied for 3rd I'm not so sure.

Even if she only moves a few percentage points, that's enough to move her a ton of spaces in a field this crowded.

We won't see the more traditional phone polls for another few days.

 

[Suikoguy]

Though I think Trump is a sexist, I see nothing sexist about what he tweeted.

Yeah, this was School Yard Bully level, rather than sexist.

 

[chadskin]

Ian Bremmer tweeted out another part of the NBC poll:

Who Won the GOP Debate? (NBC)
1 Fiorina 22%
2 Trump 18%
3 Rubio 13%
4 Cruz 12%
5 Carson 8%
6 Huckabee 5%

https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/630500027635531776

Jeb am cry.

 

[B-Dubs]

Ian Bremmer tweeted out another part of the NBC poll:

https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/630500027635531776

Jeb am cry.

Fiorina did well only because she was at the kid's table and was the only one who took it seriously. I expect her to melt under the main stage lights, she's the definition of a flavor of the month candidate.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

So realistically, how early can we expect the first candidates to drop out of the race? I'm really excited to see where the base of these candidates gravitate as the field narrows.

I feel like Graham, Pataki, Christie, Perry and Rand could probably all just call it quits at this point, but I assume they'll cling on until at least the next debate.

Thoughts?

 

[Manmademan]

Fiorina did well only because she was at the kid's table and was the only one who took it seriously. I expect her to melt under the main stage lights, she's the definition of a flavor of the month candidate.

I can see her doing well. Just on the merit of being the only woman she'll get a decent amount of questions, and not being completely clown shoes like Carson she can string together coherent answers.

Going after Trump will end BADLY for her though, since her only claim to fame is CEO of HP...a job she did poorly and got fired from. Trump will eat her alive and snatch her soul the second she tries to use her executive experience as a reason to vote for her.

 

[B-Dubs]

I can see her doing well. Just on the merit of being the only woman she'll get a decent amount of questions, and not being completely clown shoes like Carson she can string together coherent answers.

Going after Trump will end BADLY for her though, since her only claim to fame is CEO of HP...a job she did poorly and got fired from. Trump will eat her alive and snatch her soul the second she tries to use her executive experience as a reason to vote for her.

Except she's going to have to do exactly that as she has nothing else to lean on. Trump is already setting the groundwork for his eventual decapitation of Fiorina. She won't last more than one debate at the big kids table, if that.

 

[Manmademan]

Except she's going to have to do exactly that as she has nothing else to lean on. Trump is already setting the groundwork for his eventual decapitation of Fiorina. She won't last more than one debate at the big kids table, if that.

Yup. I can see her as a credible VP candidate but there are way too many big players here.

 

[Scoops]

Except she's going to have to do exactly that as she has nothing else to lean on. Trump is already setting the groundwork for his eventual decapitation of Fiorina. She won't last more than one debate at the big kids table, if that.

Oh man this sounds so exciting to watch. Can't wait until that next debate.

 

[Jack Remington]

He won't make it out of the primaries. He might have made a decent General candidate but he won't get that far.

I firmly believe that Kasich would be by far the best general election candidate the Republicans have. He's popular in a must-win state with a large number of electoral votes, and could probably win a lot of moderates.

 

[haxamin]

UK-gaf here, how does the selection for VP work? And who's likely to be Clinton and Trump's VP?

 

[Knoxcore]

I'm curious, was the previous NBC poll also from Survey Monkey?

 

[B-Dubs]

Yup. I can see her as a credible VP candidate but there are way too many big players here.

I can't see her as that either. I think Rubio is the clear VP this time. He has a decent record and can form complete sentences. I feel like Fiorina is the king of the kiddie pool, being there makes her look good but once she's in the ocean it becomes apparent she's a smallfry.

 

[Scoops]

UK-gaf here, how does the selection for VP work? And who's likely to be Clinton and Trump's VP?

Literally the presidential nominee picks whoever they want.

Most people seem to think Cory Booker or Julian Castro would be Hillary's.

Trump is not of this Earth so I don't think anyone knows.

 

[Stumpokapow]

So realistically, how early can we expect the first candidates to drop out of the race? I'm really excited to see where the base of these candidates gravitate as the field narrows.

I feel like Graham, Pataki, Christie, Perry and Rand could probably all just call it quits at this point, but I assume they'll cling on until at least the next debate.

Thoughts?

Mostly the no-hope people withdraw when particular events call their attention to the fact that they don't have a chance. The Ames straw poll (which doesn't exist anymore). Getting excluded from debates (which apparently doesn't exist anymore). Prolonged polling at 0%. Major personal scandal. Look up Tommy Thompson or Sam Brownback in 2008 or Herman Cain in 2012

Then the rest of the pack lasts until the first primaries/caucuses in January or February of the election year. So in 2012, for example, Bachmann dropped out beginning of January after losing Iowa badly; Huntsman and Perry dropped out mid-January after losing New Hampshire badly. Then everyone else lasted until April where Santorum dropped out. In 2008, Joe Biden dropped out after losing Iowa; Bill Richardson after New Hampshire; Giuliani and Edwards after Florida.

But the 2016 field is unusually large for the Republicans, so it's difficult to directly look at past elections to see what would happen. One problem is when you have 15 candidates, a lot of them are polling at 1-3%, and I guess you'd be less likely to drop out if you're tied with 10 people for 1% than if you're at 1% and your next nearest competitor is at 8% or whatever.

Still, the latest no-hopers can drop out is end of January-ish.

UK-gaf here, how does the selection for VP work? And who's likely to be Clinton and Trump's VP?

There's no reason at this juncture to believe Trump will be the Republican nominee, so the question is sort of silly. The nominee picks their VP. A variety of proposed mechanisms are said to be part of the process: can they help me win a state? Can they expand my electoral coalition? Do they cover up an obvious weakness I have? Are they a notably good campaigner? In the distant past when parties were split at the time of convention, it was said that offering the VP role helped heal the party's wounds, helped the presidential candidate get the VP's prior donor base, solidified in-party support for the nominee. But most of the formal research on VP picks has suggested they have very very little overall impact on the electoral map, so trying to read too much into it is sort of foolish.

There's no runaway obvious figure who would be the VP pick of either major party nominee. Most of the suggestions you hear right now are pretty stupid honestly and based on pretty dumb gut feeling type stuff. You should ignore about 90%+ of the analysis you read in media or news of any strategy or tactics stuff

On the subject of picking the VP, here's what one analyst thought were the top 24 choices for John McCain were in February 2008:
http://rightwingnews.com/uncategorized/john-mccains-top-24-potential-picks-for-vicepresident/
Palin is on the list... with 23 other names

Here's the LA Times in June:
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jun/30/nation/na-veepstakes30

McCain is tempted to choose his friend Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, a Democrat-turned-independent who has campaigned for the presumed Republican nominee. But he's more likely to go with Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney or Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, actual Republicans, who would be more palatable to the party's conservative core.

YEP GREAT ONE LA TIMES

Here's someone reporting on Kerry in May 2004:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/assessment/2004/05/john_kerrys_long_shortlist.html

f a central theme of John Kerry's candidacy is a fearless challenge to George W. Bush on national security, then why not add another set of (unthrown) medals to the ticket? The obvious choice here would be Wesley Clark, although his gaffe-plagued romp through the Democratic primaries is problematic. Clark's fizzle may also bode ill for former Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni, despite his new book eviscerating Bush's Iraq policy. Who wants to take a chance on another general without campaign trail experience? Still, merely floating these names helps remind the public that Democrats can be tough guys, too. Also on this list: former Sen. Max Cleland. Instead of a military man, Kerry could go for a policy-wonk father figure who understands today's global dangers—as Bush did in choosing Cheney last time. Topping this list is former Georgia Sen. Sam Nunn, who now obsesses over weapons of mass destruction at the Nuclear Threat Institute. Nunn has the added benefit of being a Southerner, although he would add to the ticket another inconveniently long Senate voting record. (Among other things, Nunn opposed the first Gulf War, a reason he didn't run for president himself in 1992.) Also in this category is former New Hampshire GOP Sen. Warren Rudman who, like Nunn, has become a WMD specialist; former Indiana Rep. Lee Hamilton, now the nobly nonpartisan vice chairman of the independent Sept. 11 commission; and, if you can get past the plagiarism that killed his 1988 presidential bid, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden. These choices would help whip up liberal Democrats, who are far more animated by Bush-hatred than by Kerry-worship. The most touted name in this category is Dick Gephardt, reportedly a top contender at the moment, whose authentic populism and miles-deep roots with labor unions and other party interest groups make him a fine signifier of liberal passion. Drawbacks include Gephardt's co-sponsorship of the Iraq resolution—heresy to some liberals—and the fact that he's already flopped twice on the presidential campaign trail. A long-shot choice is House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, a prolific fund-raiser beloved by women's and gay-rights groups. But it's hard to imagine a man scraping the "Massachusetts liberal" image off his shoe teaming up with a San Francisco liberal (think of the gay-marriage jokes). A choice harder to attack demagogically would be Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin. The real veepstakes contenders are usually almost all white men, but diversity-minded candidates float names of women and minorities to please interest groups and liberals. Hence another name on everyone's short list is the charismatic New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, who might well excite the all-important Latino vote and help carry the Southwestern swing states of Nevada and New Mexico. Alas, Richardson carries a sherpa's load of baggage from his disastrous tenure as Energy secretary. Oft-mentioned women include two attractive swing-state senators: Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana. But both have thin records, and Democrats strongly prefer not to defend any more southern Senate seats. Some African-Americans get talked about, including Georgia congressman and civil-rights hero John Lewis and South Carolina power-broker Jim Clyburn. Also on this list: Former OMB director Franklin Raines, Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, former New Hampshire Gov. Jeanne Shaheen. Given Kerry's charisma deficiency, he might want some fuel-injected charm at his side. John Edwards, whose blinding smile seduced so many crowds in the late primary season, could certainly help (if Kerry can forgive him for drawing out the primaries). Former senator and 9/11 commission member Bob Kerrey isn't nearly as warm and smooth, but he does offer McCain-like qualities of heroism and straight talk (and wouldn't Kerry-Kerrey have a cute ring!). The question here is whether Kerry could stomach having people like his running mate better than they like him. Other charmers: Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, Virginia Gov. Mark Warner. Several top contenders would never win a nationwide talent search but happen to hail from the right states. Hence the enduring appeal of Florida's two Democratic senators, Bill Nelson and Bob Graham. We won't bother rehashing Graham's obsessive-compulsive diaries and tragically self-destructed reputation, but it's all here. Nelson, meanwhile, offers the heroic patina of a former astronaut but less spark than a soggy matchbook. As a Catholic with a moderate profile on social issues, as well as a compelling biography, Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack could shore up Kerry with blue-collar voters, but is otherwise humdrum. Still, one bankable state could make the difference. And for the same egotistical reasons Kerry may spurn an Edwards, a reliable dullard could be just what he wants. Also on this list, though getting old: former Ohio Sen. John Glenn.

Edwards is on the list among 25+ other names.

2012, Romney, April:
https://web.archive.org/web/2012042...r/223525-bain-hires-hint-at-mitts-veep-choice

Two names that might fit that brainy Bain profile are Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and Ohio Sen. Rob Portman. While neither is known for offering the fieriest of profiles, both have built reputations as fiscal wonks and had stints running the Office of Management and Budget under President George W. Bush. He also said House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), who is on the frontlines of the GOP fight on spending, would fit the Bain mold. ...For example, Sen. Marco Rubio’s (R-Fla.) Cuban background, youth and conservative bona fides, coupled with hailing from the key swing state of Florida, have led some to suggest that he could be the pick to beat as Romney’s No. 2, even if those aspects would not have necessarily meant a leg up at Bain. Another new variable is demographic — bringing a woman or minority on to the ticket may be a factor being considered by the Romney camp. Beyond Rubio, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal are among those who could bring diversity to the ticket as a vice presidential nominee.

Ryan on the list with a dozen other names

 

[Manmademan]

I firmly believe that Kasich would be by far the best general election candidate the Republicans have. He's popular in a must-win state with a large number of electoral votes, and could probably win a lot of moderates.

This is why he'll go nowhere in the primary. It's Huntsmans disease.

 

[RDreamer]

I think you underestimate the absolute pure idiocy that trump is

Only stupid/racist/homophobic/sexist people vote for trump. Unfortunately, that's alot of people

Im not even american and the mere thought of trump even being in the primarys just makes me sade for humanity.

It is definitely sad for humanity, but at the same time the electoral college pretty much guarantees he won't win. stupid/racist/homophobic/sexist people exist here in abundance, but not quite enough to win him a presidency.

 

[Aaron]

Trump being so successful in GOP circles does not reflect well on GOP voters.

I think it reflects that those voters are tired of the GOP and their near identical flavors of the same unsuccessful candidates that have been touted for presidential election after election. The Republican platform is basically the one Reagan ran on in 1980. Maybe even the racists realize that can't win three and a half decades later.