Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[Todd]

OK, now that Rand Paul has officially entered the race, I think it is safe to start a thread on this topic.  Let's look at the candidates who have filed with the FEC and their chances.


Republicans:
Rand Paul – No chance
Ted Cruz – Slightly more than no chance.  Maybe 0.1% probability.  (1% if I'm feeling ten times as generous.)  But I don't want no Canuck as President.
Mark Everson – No chance
Jack Fellure – No chance


Democrats:
Jeff Boss – No chance
Robby Wells – No chance
Vermin Supreme – My favorite candidate so far.  Alas, he has no chance.


Other:
Terry Jones – No chance
Zoltan Istvan – As much as I would like to have a transhumanist President named Zoltan, he has no chance.


More seriously, but only slightly, the race I'd like to see would be between John Kasich and Martin O'Malley, but that ain't gonna happen.

How long until the 2016 election is labeled either A.) The most important election ever, in a generation, or some other very long measure of time, or B.) A turning point of some sort?

[XB-70 Valkyrie]

Thinking of the field of possible contenders for the GOP nomination (Christie, Paul, Walker et al.) conjures to mind a name for a rock band: Jeb and the Whack Jobs

I would love to see Elizabeth Warren enter the race--even though she will likely not win, she could certainly bring a lot of important issues front and center. Likely the only winners in this election will be crony capitalism, banks, defense contractors, and horrific "too big to fail" companies like Comcast, ATT, General Motors, etc. 

[Todd]

Depending on how far they get, I wouldn't quite call Kasich or Pataki whack jobs.

It would seem troubling that Democrats are now so opposed to democracy that they appear set to simply hand the nomination to someone.  Hopefully that changes.  Besides, we need at least one more woman in the race so that I can perform an Arrested Development character analysis of the candidates.  Hillary is clearly Lucille, but who would play the part of Lindsay?  Maybe Carly I Ruined a Company, Imagine What I Can Do To The Country Fiorina.

[XB-70 Valkyrie]

Sorry, don't know much about them, but I reserve the right to apply the "whack job" label to climate change deniers, evolution deniers, and anti-vaxers. Christie is just plain contemptible in other ways.

[Todd]

Sorry, don't know much about them, but I reserve the right to apply the "whack job" label to climate change deniers, evolution deniers, and anti-vaxers.

Climate change and evolution denial is a far right Republican specialty, but anti-vaccine fools populate both major parties, so it is not inconceivable that a Democrat could utter stoopid comments on this subject on the campaign trail.  I hope so.  So far the biggest gaffe from Hillary has probably been her claim of poverty.  We haven't really hit full blown gaffe season yet, so there is some good stuff to look forward to.

[ibanezmonster]

Vermin Supreme looks like the best candidate so far.

[Gurn Blanston]

Jeb is the least objectionable choice to me so far, which is not saying a whole lot, given the depth of my objections to all the others. I'm talking people who have a chance here, Todd, not some of the actual potential non-dumbasses you brought up.

Depending on how far they get, I wouldn't quite call Kasich or Pataki whack jobs.

It would seem troubling that Democrats are now so opposed to democracy that they appear set to simply hand the nomination to someone.  Hopefully that changes.  Besides, we need at least one more woman in the race so that I can perform an Arrested Development character analysis of the candidates.  Hillary is clearly Lucille, but who would play the part of Lindsay?  Maybe Carly I Ruined a Company, Imagine What I Can Do To The Country Fiorina.

Oh, c'mon, Sarah is still around... and that other crackpot from Minnesota (no, not Mn Dave, the female one)... 

[Todd]

Oh, c'mon, Sarah is still around... and that other crackpot from Minnesota (no, not Mn Dave, the female one)... 

Unfortunately, neither one will run. 

I am sticking to candidates who have filed for now.  Some possible candidates won't even do that.  The list will grow as time goes on.

[Gurn Blanston]

Unfortunately, neither one will run. 

I am sticking to candidates who have filed for now.  Some possible candidates won't even do that.  The list will grow as time goes on.

Well, screw it then, what fun is a circus without the clowns?   

[Todd]

Well, screw it then, what fun is a circus without the clowns?

Exactly!  We have to wait a bit before the jackasses start braying uncontrollably and the elephants start shitting uncontrollably on the floor.

[XB-70 Valkyrie]

If ever there was a year for a third party candidate (not necessarily good news depending on who it is!)

[Gurn Blanston]

Exactly!  We have to wait a bit before the jackasses start braying uncontrollably and the elephants start shitting uncontrollably on the floor.

Very well, I accept your wise counsel of patience (meanwhile, making plans to move to Madagascar or some other, saner place).   

[Todd]

I would love to see Elizabeth Warren enter the race--even though she will likely not win, she could certainly bring a lot of important issues front and center. Likely the only winners in this election will be crony capitalism, banks, defense contractors, and horrific "too big to fail" companies like Comcast, ATT, General Motors, etc.

Comcast and (especially) AT&T are a bit dated, but your basic premise has some foundation in reality.  From the now old article, my favorite quote is:

"If it turns out to be Jeb versus Hillary we would love that and either outcome would be fine," one top Republican-leaning Wall Street lawyer said over lunch in midtown Manhattan last week. "We could live with either one. Jeb versus Joe Biden would also be fine. It's Rand Paul or Ted Cruz versus someone like Elizabeth Warren that would be everybody's worst nightmare."

If ever there was a year for a third party candidate (not necessarily good news depending on who it is!)

Only if it is this guy:

[Brian]

So far the biggest gaffe from Hillary has probably been her claim of poverty.  We haven't really hit full blown gaffe season yet, so there is some good stuff to look forward to.

I'd say the biggest gaffe so far has been Jeb Bush publishing people's SSNs because they were in his correspondence, but that's not anywhere near as fun as somebody saying "Ubekibekistanstan" or "oops".

[ibanezmonster]

If Ted Cruz becomes president, I may have to reconsider moving to Japan.

[drogulus]

     

I would love to see Elizabeth Warren enter the race--even though she will likely not win, she could certainly bring a lot of important issues front and center.

   The political machinery of one and a half parties and the entirety of the banking/financial industry is dedicated to the proposition that Warren is the nightmare from which they would not awaken. They are right to be concerned. We got the New Deal to keep Huey Long and Norman Thomas at bay. My worry is we'll waste the Warren moment and get nothing.

[drogulus]

     I agree with Warren that while better regulation of banks is desirable, more desirable still is that they be torn to pieces.

[Todd]

     
   The political machinery of one and a half parties and the entirety of the banking/financial industry is dedicated to the proposition that Warren is the nightmare from which they would not awaken. They are right to be concerned. We got the New Deal to keep Huey Long and Norman Thomas at bay. My worry is we'll waste the Warren moment and get nothing.

Warren talks a good Progressive game, but the reason she knows the one percenters are so devious and dangerous is because she is one herself.  The difference between what she says and what she would be able to do in an executive position is vast.  She engages in a lot of Say-Do.

[drogulus]

     Wealth doesn't put you on the wrong side if you don't want it to. The wealthy are just as capable of acting against the perceived interest of their class as poor Mississippians voting their master's ideology. The labor movement, for all its faults, provided a counterweight to the master class that hasn't been replaced. Warren would IMO tip the scales slightly towards a unified view of the economy as a system in need of balance. We need to better afford buying what we produce, and reduce the finance tax on the rest of the economy. It would good to reduce the"tax tax" as well, but only if we cut taxes on spending (low to middle income) rather than another iteration of tax cuts on dead money.

     Whether Warren succeeds or not isn't the only worthwhile question. I know she's the best chance at the moment, and with O'Malley in the WH and Warren in the Senate the Democratic Party would be a different entity than it's been since before Clinton I was elected. I have no idea if the time is really right or not, only that we won't get anything but what we have with the other predictably complacent alternatives. As for the Dingbat caucus that holds a veto over the course of the Republicans, they look strong now but that could change.

[Todd]

Wealth doesn't put you on the wrong side if you don't want it to.

What does this even mean?  What is the wrong side and what is the right side?

I'm less sanguine about Warren's intentions and abilities than you seem to be.  Forget her predictable, heavy-handed rhetoric - the last op-ed I read from her was filled with a list of what all Democrats and Republicans "should" do and believe - and look at the tangible results of the high profile project that she worked on, namely the CFPB.  Yes, it is slapping big fines on banks, and various other companies; yes, it is going after payday lenders; yes, it will even start work in small business lending.  Look a little harder, though, and one sees that the banks themselves benefit from the CFPB.  It is funded by the Fed, which itself has direct oversight of some banks, and the CFPB also defers to other federal regulators of banks (eg, the FDIC).  It faces no restraint in dealing with non-bank entities.  The practical reality is that while the CFPB can fine banks, it cannot stop them from operating.  It can and does with non-bank entities.  It is morphing into an ally of banks.  It appears to be succumbing to regulatory capture.  I find it hard to believe that Ms Warren did not know this was a real possibility.  Perhaps she has some grand scheme to implement overt political control over the Fed and other independent agencies at some point in the future, but based on current reality, it looks like she helped form a government agency that sure sounds nice, but ends acting in a manner not originally envisioned.

If Warren stays in the Senate, she will be one of many.  She is no Harry Reid, let alone Richard Russell. 

O'Malley as President could be fun, provided he faces a Republican Congress.