The obvious picks for the 2016 presidential nominations are Hillary Clinton for the Dems and Jeb Bush for the Republicans.
As for Bush, others have noted that during the last 50 years, the Republicans have always started their primary campaigns with a front runner and the front runner has always won the nomination, for better or worse. Another way of looking at this is the “next in line” system whereby the Republicans reward a person who has waited around through an election cycle or two to be anointed. 2016 could be an exception, but Republicans, being traditionalists and favoring the sons of established family wealth and/or social/political standing, tend to follow their own established traditions. That makes Bush, by far, the odds on favorite, regardless of the feeling many people have against have a virtual replay of 1992, Bush versus Clinton.
Not much needs to be said here about Clinton. There are miles of words being written pro and con. When she ran in 2008, she failed to define a vision for how and where she wanted to lead the country. If she fails on that level again in 2016, Bush could win because he is smart enough and experienced as a politician to be able to outline a vision for the nation. Last time round, Mrs. Clinton relied on the idea of being the first woman president and continuing the successes, but not the excesses, of her husband. That won’t be enough for 2016.
Here are the TerryReport standings:
SOME CHANCE (for the nomination)
Martin O’Malley (Dem) (a successful governor little known outside Maryland)
Jim Webb (Dem) (a formable person who finds a way to exceed expectations and defy odds)
Marco Rubio (Rep) Young and handsome, Rubio is only a first term US Senator but it is a mighty leap even for highly experienced politicians to go into a presidential campaign. The “pros” would say it is a near impossibility, but then, we have Obama as president and G.W. Bush became president after barely six years in elective office (with a lot of family experience behind him, of course.)
Scott Walker (too far back, too little know, too controversial, his administration even tried to re-write the mission statement of the University of Wisconsin to make it more like a vocational traning school and then claimed it was an editing error, but he has still a chance (mistakes made early on don’t count for much because most people don’t hear about them and those who do don’t remember them anyway.)
Chris Christie (A large candidate who does not possess the personal emotional control to be president and one who might repulse the old line Republicans, especially if they get to know him better. )
VERY LITTLE TO NO CHANCE
Rand Paul (already shot himself in the foot, repeatedly and shows no signs of learning fast enough to become a real candidate this time around)
Ted Cruz (might even prove too radical even for Texas. Got one fixed idea about politics and economics as a teenagers and he’s stickin’ with it.)
Carly Fiorina (former corporate CEO, might make a veep choice, but not even that is likely)